Monk Issues, Simple Solution

[Trickery]

Felt the need to update this opening post to keep everyone up-to-date with the thread progress.

From the discussion, the thread has broken down into three main camps:

People who think the Monk class is strong at high levels - Everyone.
People who think some of the Monk subclasses need some tweaks - Everyone.
People who think the Monk class itself needs a few tweaks - Some people, including myself.

There's really no need to argue about whether the Monk is viable past level 10 or whether the subclasses are perfect as written. We all agree that the answers are yes and no, respectively.

Refresher: survey where the Monk was rated as mechanically the second-weakest class, deserved or not: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?592452-Dnd-5e-questionnaire-Answers

I think this stems from some core issues the Monk has in early levels - the levels where most play happens. After a lot of discussion, I've changed my stance. I think the base Monk chassis can be significantly improved without affecting high-level play or invalidating anyone else by making two changes:

Remove Ki cost for Step of the Wind to make it consistent with similar features from other classes and races.
Add an ASI at level 6 so the class can afford to take an extra feat rather than putting all ASIs into attributes.

These changes would allow the Monk to use its unique features more often, especially at low levels, and would allow Monk players additional opportunity to customize their character.

Beyond that, some of the subclasses need a few tweaks in my opinion, and the Four Elements Monk probably needs a full rework (which has been done a few times). Those points are best left to their own threads.


Many have pointed out that the Monk is a flawed class. According to several surveys, including this one (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?592452-Dnd-5e-questionnaire-Answers), Monks rank as one of the worst classes mechanically and one of players' least favorite classes. They aren't quite as hated as the Ranger, but they may be even less optimal in play at most levels. While the Ranger gets a lot of power early on that allows it to keep up in combat, the Monk does not. You can do your own analysis on this if you like, but it's not needed. Here's one source that shows how the Monk compares to other martials for damage at most levels (external link): https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/4cg25y/a_dpr_analysis_of_the_martial_classes_levels_111/.

As many have noted, the Monk trades damage for mobility, evasiveness, and Ki abilities. Unfortunately, most of these abilities are barely usable at low levels due to Ki progression. Additionally, the Monk has hit points comparable to a Rogue but fewer options for avoiding damage. They don't get Uncanny Dodge like the Rogue does.

Worst of all, Monks suffer from MADness. For those who don't know, MAD stands for Multi-Attribute Dependence. Monk attacks are based on Dexterity, their Ki saving throw is based on Wisdom, and their armor is based on both.

This is the biggest limiting factor of the class. If a Monk takes any feats, they will be sub-optimal for one or both of their main statistics for most of their leveling career. In fact, a Monk cannot hit 20 AC and max out both Wisdom and Dexterity before level 16.

Due to this and their features being fixed with no options, Monks have few choices to make.

I think their multi-attribute dependence is the main problem with the Monk class. The abilities are flavorful, if narrow, but the Monk cannot make good use of them until later levels as written. I think Monks would be better off if they were dependent only on their Dexterity. That would allow them to max out their primary attribute by level 8, similar to a Rogue or Fighter, and would allow them to take more feats.

One way to change Monk might be:

Ki saving throw changed to use Dexterity.
Unarmored Defense changed to be 10 + DEX + Proficiency, AC range = 15 to 21 (old was 16 to 20)
Change Diamond Soul to something the Monk gets every four levels, choosing one saving throw in which to gain proficiency each time.
Total Ki pool = proficiency * 3.

Between Diamond Soul and SADness, the Monk would have at least five more choices to make over the course of its career (two feats, three diamond soul choices before fourth is fixed). Sure, Constitution and Wisdom would usually be the optimal choices to get first with Diamond Soul, but not always. Additionally, Monks would have far more Ki to use at low levels when the class struggles to contribute, but wouldn't be much changed at high levels with this Ki formula.

What do you think? Should Monks be MAD as they are now, and is it fine for the class to have so few choices to make? Are you fine with Monks starting off so weak but turning into Ki batteries by high levels? If so, is some other problem at the core of why the class is considered weak?

[Lunali]

Monks aren't particularly weak at low levels, they just aren't able to use their ki abilities very much. The link you have actually shows as much.

[Trickery]

Monks aren't particularly weak at low levels, they just aren't able to use their ki abilities very much. The link you have actually shows as much.

For damage that's true. Their damage is not all that far from other martials. But their armor, HP, and general usefulness are far lower than most other martial classes at low levels. Monks rely on their Ki abilities to provide benefit to the rest of the party.

[Hail Tempus]

Monks aren't particularly weak at low levels, they just aren't able to use their ki abilities very much. The link you have actually shows as much. I suspect this happens because so many DMs are doing the 5 minute adventuring day. If a DM follows the adventuring day guidelines of 2-3 short rests per adventuring day, a 3rd level monk should be getting 9-12 ki points during a typical adventuring day. That seems like plenty, even at low levels.

The lack of popularity for monks is probably largely due to more novice players not really understanding their role. Players who take their monk into a fight and try to slug it out with the enemies is a common playing style.

[Trickery]

I suspect this happens because so many DMs are doing the 5 minute adventuring day. If a DM follows the adventuring day guidelines of 2-3 short rests per adventuring day, a 3rd level monk should be getting 9-12 ki points during a typical adventuring day. That seems like plenty, even at low levels.

The lack of popularity for monks is probably largely due to more novice players not really understanding their role. Players who take their monk into a fight and try to slug it out with the enemies is a common playing style.

You know I've heard that there should be 2-3 rests per day, but I've never seen a DM actually enforce that. In my experience, players take short rests whenever they please, and it's difficult to stop them. I'm thinking more about difficult fights where you might drop three Ki points in one round and then be out.

To your second point, I'm not getting my information from novice players. If anything, novice players seem to like the Monk more than veterans. It's a common class I see both played by and recommended to new players due to its simplicity, straightforward playstyle, and the player's relative inability to make many mistakes in building a Monk (because they make few choices in the first place).

[stoutstien]

For damage that's true. Their damage is not all that far from other martials. But their armor, HP, and general usefulness are far lower than most other martial classes at low levels. Monks rely on their Ki abilities to provide benefit to the rest of the party.

-Assuming equally built characters, At lv one monk has better AC than a rogue and can reach a higher total.

-the d8 is pretty standard for a hit die for second line classes.

-no idea how to judge general usefulness. No parameters.

-monks are MaD and if you want to max both of the primary stats it doesn't leave a lot of space. To make up for it monks get a ton of class features that allow the monk to always be relevant. They pretty much get 3-5 feats baked in.

Saying that, I personally believe the ki cost of a lot of the Monk's features are off. Not really a balance concern but one of flavor. Could make step to the wind free.

[Hail Tempus]

You know I've heard that there should be 2-3 rests per day, but I've never seen a DM actually enforce that. In my experience, players take short rests whenever they please, and it's difficult to stop them. I'm thinking more about difficult fights where you might drop three Ki points in one round and then be out. From what I’ve seen on this board and others, there seem to be many DMs who have the players do 1-2 encounters a day. It’s a common problem, which shortchanges the short rest classes and makes the long rest classes shine.

At third level, a hard encounter that requires a monk to burn through all his resources in one round is fine, so long as the party gets a short rest afterwords. Anyway, most fights are over in 4 rounds or so, so it’s not like the monk needs to go ki-less for 10 rounds.

I think your proposals are too much of a buff for a class that is generally well balanced. Monks are like Paladins in that they don’t need feats to round out their abilities, so it’s fine that they’re MAD.

As for player choice in building a character, given that most campaigns seem to peter our around 10th level or so, most characters (other than fighters and rogues) only get two decision points for their ASIs during their adventuring career. And many classes will use those to max out their main ability score anyway.

[Trickery]

-Assuming equally built characters, At lv one monk has better AC than a rogue and can reach a higher total.

-the d8 is pretty standard for a hit die for second line classes.

-no idea how to judge general usefulness. No parameters.

-monks are MaD and if you want to max both of the primary stats it doesn't leave a lot of space. To make up for it monks get a ton of class features that allow the monk to always be relevant. They pretty much get 3-5 feats baked in.

You know, I thought people generally understood the reasons why the Monk class is weak, so I didn't get into it. But now that I have to, let me get into it. This is going to get detailed.

Monk can reach a higher AC total than the rogue by late levels assuming that the rogue doesn't simply take a level of fighter or the feat moderately armored to use a shield, or gain any magic armor. However, unlike rogues, Monks don't get uncanny dodge, don't get bonus action hide with Expertise, and don't have the opportunity to stay in the "second line" and still fill their role. They need to be in the front using stunning strike to be useful.

This is where general usefulness comes in. Even at level 1, the Rogue can be an effective scout, negotiator, spotter, or similar with their expertise. Fighter and Barbarian are also great at level 1 for their hit points, high damage, and good armor at that level. Wizards have many spells and rituals. Clerics are great at everything and can heal and buff. Even Rangers are decent with their medium armor and longbow or sword and shield.

Monk at level 1 has shield-less fighter AC with a Rogue's hit die, less damage than a fighter or barbarian, and no special abilities. That sucks. They need their special abilities to provide value to the party, but they don't have any yet.

Level 2 is when they get Ki, but only enough for two effects per short rest. Those effects should be Stunning Strike, except the Monk doesn't have that yet. They have flurry of blows, disengage, dash, and dodge. Flurry if blows results in damage comparable to a defensive Fighter who is surging (compare 1d8+2d4+9 quarterstaff monk to 2d8+10 for standard dueling sword and board, no feats). Disengage and Dash are things the Rogue can do for free (you noticed this as well). Dodge as a bonus action is nice except that it cuts the Monk's damage in half - the only thing they're doing at this level - and results in them being only roughly as tanky as a fighter with a shield for that round (effective AC for the Monk is around 19 but they have fewer hit points and no Second Wind).

Monks are MAD, but they are more MAD than other MAD classes. A Paladin doesn't need maxed Charisma to be effective. Nor does an Eldritch Knight need maxed intelligence, or a blade pact Warlock need maxed strength or dexterity, or a Ranger need maxed Wisdom, or a Bladesinger Wizard need maxed Dexterity. All of these classes have ways around their shortcomings while still be effective.

The Monk does not. The big thing that the Monk brings to the group is their mobility and Stunning Strike. The Monk can get into the back lines and stun a caster, but only if they can land their attacks and get the target to fail its save. That means that they need their Dexterity maxed to hit but also need their Wisdom maxed to make the target less likely to succeed on its saving throw. The Monk starts off just doing okay damage, but their damage drops off hard at later levels, making them more and more reliant on landing Stunning Strikes on key targets.

Regarding Monk features, most of them are situational and many are irrelevant in combat. Tongue of the Sun and the Moon would be great if Monks got it at a level that casters didn't already have a million ways to get around communication barriers. Timeless Body doesn't help you fight, but would be great if it came at a level where players might actually have difficulty getting food. Movement speed +20 at level 10 is nice, but would be a lot nicer if it came earlier so that the Monk could better do its job of getting into the back lines with the enemy spell casters. Purity of Body is pretty good, but sure would be a lot nicer around level 5.

That's the issue. The Monk doesn't start getting its really useful and thematic features until levels where they don't matter as much anymore. Until then, they're generally worse than other Martial classes.

Open Hand Monks are pretty useful for pushing creatures and knocking them prone, but not every Monk is Open Hand, and fighters with a feat or level of Rogue for Expertise Athletics can do this more reliably. Warlocks can also push and pull targets more reliably, and some Warlocks can knock targets prone without a saving throw. Once again, Warlocks have the same hit points that a Monk does, but some Warlocks take additional defensive features that the Monk cannot. Plus the Open Hand Monk can't hold its action to knock a target prone because bonus actions cannot be held. This means that the Monk might not be able to benefit its party with this feature depending on initiative order - the creature might take its turn right after and get back up.

In short, Monks need to be around level 7 before they really start being able to contribute to the group. By that point, their damage is starting to fall off pretty badly. But they can provide stunning strike to the group when it lands. We all know Constitution saves are some of the worst to target. This really does limit Monks to being most effective against enemy casters. There are other classes that can lock down casters more easily from further away, even including the much-maligned Sorcerer.

Basically, it's difficult to think of a role the Monk can fill that someone else can't do better. Most of the ideas one can come up with require the use of lots of Ki points which the low level Monk does not have.

[Hail Tempus]

Sure, a monk does less damage than barbarians or fighters. And a monk doesn’t have as easy access to dodge or disengage as a rogue. But it’s an unfair comparison, since you’re comparing the main class abilities of those other classes against a monk’s secondary abilities.

A monk’s job is different from the classes you mentioned, and it’s abilities are balanced differently. A monk shouldn’t be better at fightering or rogueing than those respective classes. Monks get additional abilities to make up for their weaknesses.

A third level monk can attack two times in a turn, can move 40 feet per round, can catch arrows, and doesn’t need ki for any of this.

I think the problem in your analysis is that you’re picking and choosing the best abilities of other classes, then arguing that monks aren’t as good as those classes because it doesn’t have access to those top tier abilities.

[stoutstien]

As I DM way more than not, I will be the first to admit that a well played monk is one of the hardest thing to deal with.

[Talsin]

The Monk does not. The big thing that the Monk brings to the group is their mobility and Stunning Strike. The Monk can get into the back lines and stun a caster, but only if they can land their attacks and get the target to fail its save. That means that they need their Dexterity maxed to hit but also need their Wisdom maxed to make the target less likely to succeed on its saving throw. The Monk starts off just doing okay damage, but their damage drops off hard at later levels, making them more and more reliant on landing Stunning Strikes on key targets.

So given your statements here, how does your suggested fix allow the monk to effectively do their stunning strike? Your fix has given incentive to not put points into WIS, as it no longer gives the benefits to the monk. Your suggested fix leaves the monk not wanting to use stunning strike at all since it takes further investment to be useful.




Basically, it's difficult to think of a role the Monk can fill that someone else can't do better. Most of the ideas one can come up with require the use of lots of Ki points which the low level Monk does not have.

Further here, you address that outside of the start of the game, the monk doesn't act as a damage dealer either.

I would suggest instead pushing harder on making the build wisdom based.

AC = 10+wis+Prof
Attack using Monk Weapons = Prof + Wis
Change Diamond Soul to something the Monk gets every four levels, choosing one saving throw in which to gain proficiency each time. (I liked this change and thought it a good change)
Flurry of Blows damage = Monk weapon + str/dex + wis

This would allow the monk to prioritize WIS as a primary attribute, while still allowing DEX or STR to operate as damage a damage bonus when kicking out for damage. If a monk wants to do the damage more, this would allow it.

[YugiSyta]

Level 2 is when they get Ki, but only enough for two effects per short rest. Those effects should be Stunning Strike, except the Monk doesn't have that yet. They have flurry of blows, disengage, dash, and dodge. Flurry if blows results in damage comparable to a defensive Fighter who isn't surging (compare 1d8+2d4+9 quarterstaff monk to 2d8+10 for standard dueling sword and board, no feats). Disengage and Dash are things the Rogue can do for free (you noticed this as well). Dodge as a bonus action is nice except that it cuts the Monk's damage in half - the only thing they're doing at this level - and results in them being only roughly as tanky as a fighter with a shield for that round (effective AC for the Monk is around 19 but they have fewer hit points and no Second Wind.

Think you have your math wrong there my dude. The monk part is right, but you're off on your fighter. If they're a sword and board, at level two, without surging, they get one attack, meaning 1d8+5, which means a level 2 monk doesn't even need to flurry to keep up on average. 1d8+5 on average is 9.5 or 10 depending on how you slice it, a monk would have 1d8+1d4+6 which is somewhere between 13 to 14. Even if you give a extra .25 reduction to the monk because they might miss more often with more attacks its comparable, again without flurry.

[Misterwhisper]

The main issues with monks are as follows:

1. No variety:

All monks are going to have dex 16, wis and con 14, with low other stats. They will have a 2 handed monk weapon that does 1d8 and unarmed for 1d4.

That is about it.

2. Stat dependence:

Monks need so many stats that unless you are variant human you will probably never get to take a feat in a point buy game.

3. No feat support.

There are no feats that are great for monks. Most of the best combat related feats just don’t work for you.

4. No magic gear support.

Magic gloves or unarmed weapons just plain don’t exist. No monk or ki related magic wondrous items.

[Trickery]

Think you have your math wrong there my dude. The monk part is right, but you're off on your fighter. If they're a sword and board, at level two, without surging, they get one attack, meaning 1d8+5, which means a level 2 monk doesn't even need to flurry to keep up on average. 1d8+5 on average is 9.5 or 10 depending on how you slice it, a monk would have 1d8+1d4+6 which is somewhere between 13 to 14. Even if you give a extra .25 reduction to the monk because they might miss more often with more attacks its comparable, again without flurry.

Meant to say with surging. My mistake. Let me revise.

Now, to address the other comments.

The statement that Monks are mechanically bad isn't just my opinion. Near as I can tell, that's a majority opinion. It becomes more apparent when you play with one and compare them to an optimized build.

People keep saying that Monks shouldn't have good damage or survivability because they do other things like catch arrows or stun. My contention is that the many situational buffs that the Monk has are not comparable to just having higher damage and higher hit points virtually all of the time.

I can come up with specific situations where a given Monk will be good, but only one or two of their buffs are likely to be useful in a given fight. If there's an enemy caster in the back, there probably isn't a creature trying to frighten you in the front, or difficult terrain that must be navigated to get to the target, or a row of archers on top of a climbable surface as well. Rather, an encounter is likely to have one or two things that a Monk feature covers, and that one Monk feature won't make up for their shortcomings compared to other options in the moment.

Additionally, one of the most common types of fight is a single powerful creature with legendary actions. Monks don't really have anything for that. Their Stunning Strike probably isn't going to land, and their inferior defenses (especially the lack of Uncanny Dodge) will probably get them killed if they don't Disengage and Dodge frequently.

Some others have pointed out that one of the issues with the Monk is a lack of feat and magic item support. I think that's true, but I would expand on that. The other second-biggest issue with the Monk is the lack of an ability to customize into a role. Everyone else can do this, focusing more on damage or on survival, etc. The Monk basically can't. They have their subclasses, but that's about it.

Otherwise, the Monk is limited to what the base class allows, which is more broad than narrow and doesn't allow the Monk to be especially good at handling any particular kind of encounter except one built with the Monk in mind.

If I'm a DM and I know this, then I'm making sure to include things the Monk can do in fights. But few DMs know how to cater their campaign to the strengths and weaknesses of their players or are willing to do so. And pre-mades, which are popular, would often need to be tweaked.

I've talked about MADness and how it specifically hurts Monks more than other classes. Whether you go Dex based or Wis based, I hope we can all at least agree that Monks shouldn't need to max both to be competitive.

Having Ki from level 1, AC = 10 + prof + wisdom or dexterity, wisdom or dexterity to attack rolls and damage, and wisdom or dexterity for their saving throw would probably be a good start on its own. And one simple change to Ki would be to let the Monk's total be level + wisdom or dexterity modifier. I've seen this proposal before and it seems reasonable to me. It gives them a Ki bonus that has more of an impact at early levels when the class struggles more. Again, I think the class is great at high levels, but that's because their role and skillset have better solidified by that point such that they have some unique capabilities compared to other classes and can freely use their Ki abilities.

[Allistar]

I think the problem in your analysis is that you’re picking and choosing the best abilities of other classes, then arguing that monks aren’t as good as those classes because it doesn’t have access to those top tier abilities.

On the one hand I agree with this, but I also agree with Trickery a bit here too.

In my own personal experiences with monks (4 variations) they didn't really take off until around level 4 or 5. Up until that time I felt like I was basically a watered down version of other classes. They aren't tanky enough to take many hits, they deal meh damage, and their utility was pretty minimal/already covered. Sure they're mobile and can try to pummel the caster in the back lines, but the archer can also just snipe them down from 150ft away (add the sharpshooter feat and it's even worse). The archetypes deal with some of this, but those too feel watered down. Speaking from personal experience way of the fist is nice but fighters can also do most of this already and they probably do it better, especially battlemasters. Way of the 4 elements is nice, but the ki costs are too high and the abilities lackluster enough that the warlock's spellcasting starts looking good in comparison. Way of shadows is actually pretty sick but the arcane trickster hits most of the same beats. The only other one I've played was the way of the drunken master, but that campaign ended before I could do any extensive experimenting with that one. Also I'm completely with Misterwhisper, great observation.

I don't think the monk is particularly bad in any of its forms, but it's that in almost every case other classes have better ways of doing what the monk can and they get them sooner. All this being said, I still love the monk, and I will probably still play them even though they're not the best.

[Nagog]

This is the biggest limiting factor of the class. If a Monk takes any feats, they will be sub-optimal for one or both of their main statistics for most of their leveling career. In fact, a Monk cannot hit 20 AC and max out both Wisdom and Dexterity before level 16.


I can attest that this is untrue. I havent done so with a monk, but unless you use a point-buy system, you can do it. I had a bard that had maxed out Dex and Cha by level 4 taking the Actor feat. The same is possible for a Monk if you roll well and choose your race right. Kenku and Aarakokra come to mind, but there may be others. Take one of those, at level 4 grab Observant. You now can have 2 maxed stats (Dex and Wis) and the bonuses of Observant.


You know I've heard that there should be 2-3 rests per day, but I've never seen a DM actually enforce that. In my experience, players take short rests whenever they please, and it's difficult to stop them. I'm thinking more about difficult fights where you might drop three Ki points in one round and then be out.

To your second point, I'm not getting my information from novice players. If anything, novice players seem to like the Monk more than veterans. It's a common class I see both played by and recommended to new players due to its simplicity, straightforward playstyle, and the player's relative inability to make many mistakes in building a Monk (because they make few choices in the first place).

Well if you haven't seen DMs enforce that, enforce it. It isn't hard, you could even reduce the total time it takes to encourage it. Warlocks, Wizards, and Paladins will also be very grateful.

[Talsin]

@Trickery Do you think it would be reasonable to consider the class as a chassis acceptable if the subclasses allowed it to specialize into a role? Open Hand would be more stunning-fist, Shadow more rogue/assassin, 4-elements more Druidic, Kensei more Fightery, Drunken more bardic, and sun soul be more street-fightery?

[Particle_Man]

I enforce the short rest long test stuff by tying it to number of encounters instead of to in game time. So no short rest benefits until they have had their second and fourth encounters and no long rest benefits until they have had their sixth encounter, no matter how much sleep they get. Works for me.

Oh and mobility is pretty awesome for a monk. Especially a wood elf monk.

[Waazraath]

Some things to consider:

1) at low levels, making 2 or 3 attacks is great, cause many opponents drop with 1 hit. That's why in my experience 2 weapon fighting is very nice at lower levels, only to become lackluster later (less damage, and more interesting uses of bonus actions). Monks are great here though, at these lower levels, with 2 or 3 attacks when the rest has 1 or 2.

2) monks are great when rolling for stats (and rolling high). A heavy armor fighter only gets 1 extra damage, to hit and hp when rolling 2 great scores (18 after modifiers, put in str and con). A monk has +1 to hit, +1 damage (on all attacks, which are more!), +2 ac and +2 initiative (18 in dex and wis after modifiers).


As for the math, at level 1, a monk is comparable in damage to a 2 weapon fighting fighter: 1d8 + stat / 1d4 + stat, vs 1d6 + stat / 1d6 + stat. At later levels, with flurry, damage goes up, and a monk can turn instead into a temporary skirmisher (disengage) or tank (dodge). Options are nice.

Wouldn't have minded though if they had gotten an extra skill or something at lvl 1.

Agree on some of the issues Misterwhisper put forth; they are stat dependent, and have only few feats that make them shine (though alert is nice - stun 'em before they can act, as is mobile for supreme mobility). There are nice items though - afb, but I think bracers of armor work with them, and they can wield short swords and quarterstaffs, and there are plenty of nice ones. The Tiamat adventure has an item that increases unarmed strikes, so there's that.

[Trickery]

I can attest that this is untrue. I havent done so with a monk, but unless you use a point-buy system, you can do it. I had a bard that had maxed out Dex and Cha by level 4 taking the Actor feat. The same is possible for a Monk if you roll well and choose your race right. Kenku and Aarakokra come to mind, but there may be others. Take one of those, at level 4 grab Observant. You now can have 2 maxed stats (Dex and Wis) and the bonuses of Observant.



Well if you haven't seen DMs enforce that, enforce it. It isn't hard, you could even reduce the total time it takes to encourage it. Warlocks, Wizards, and Paladins will also be very grateful.

If you roll stats and roll well, you an just make a Monk 1 / Bladesinger Wizard and have up to 25AC while bladesinging naked. I don't think most tables roll for stats in 2019, and that's not something you can guarantee.

Additionally, the whole enforcing the number of short rests players can take - I can't say if it's common, but I've never seen it. It doesn't jive with the idea the the players are in charge of their own characters. You, the DM, are not the one trying to take a short rest. Therefore, you shouldn't decide when the players are allowed to do it. I think the separation between player choices and DM control is important enough to risk players unbalancing a game.


@Trickery Do you think it would be reasonable to consider the class as a chassis acceptable if the subclasses allowed it to specialize into a role? Open Hand would be more stunning-fist, Shadow more rogue/assassin, 4-elements more Druidic, Kensei more Fightery, Drunken more bardic, and sun soul be more street-fightery?

That's sort of what we have, but the subclasses don't specialize strongly enough. That said, I think Sun Soul did a pretty good job customizing the Monk actually. It successfully added a scaling ranged attack dealing radiant damage and some AoE options. That archetype only needs one tweak: a regular bonus action ray attack.

But subclasses are one of those things that's a constant annoyance for me. The Wizard class has great archetypes that really customize it into a role without taking away from or competing with what it already does. Cleric also has some great, meaningful, playstyle-altering subclasses.

But, in general, the other classes didn't get the same treatment in the PHB. Thief rogue is a rogue who can do other things with its bonus action instead of what it was going to do. Barbarians are still hitting things and taking hits, but a little bit better at one or the other. Sorcerer origins in the PHB add a few features that come up sometimes but hardly define a playstyle. Beastmaster Ranger gains a creature, but it requires the Ranger's own actions to command. With PHB archetypes, usually there seems to be a trade-off or some small enhancements rather than something new.

The Monk is no exception. Open Hand, Shadow, and Four Elements are just Monks with some tricks that help sometimes, and most of those tricks compete with other Ki abilities. One of the reasons why people like Open Hand so much is because its features don't compete with what it normally does.

[stoutstien]

I think monks get a bad rep due to over value on hyper focused build that Excel and one or two things ( usually damage and damage) which shades classes build for flexibility in a bad light.
A monk will never be the best at any one task but without trying it can be second best in a lot of situations.

Rouge scouting ahead? Monk can join in and watch your back

Front line fighting getting over ran? Step up and ba dodge a few rounds to relive some pressure.

Enemies retreated and don't want to over extend? Whip out a bow and continue to push them back while staying near the party.

Negotiating with a foreign power? Your keen eyes and ears can pick up if the other side is lying and at one point if they try to use an unknown language you are still privy to the conversation even if they disallowed any magic due to a taboo.

[RulesJD]

For what it's worth, the easiest way to balance Monk damage is:

Ban GWM + SS.

It might not be optimal, but it's the easiest. Taking out those feats drops the huge spikey damage everyone can output except for smiting Paladins and Rogue's Sneak Attack.

[Trickery]

For what it's worth, the easiest way to balance Monk damage is:

Ban GWM + SS.

It might not be optimal, but it's the easiest. Taking out those feats drops the huge spikey damage everyone can output except for smiting Paladins and Rogue's Sneak Attack.

What about Hexblade Warlocks / Sorlocks, Nuclear Wizards, Moon Druids utilizing summons, or even the old Polearm Master Sentinel Fighter or Barbarian? I think all of those things are better than GWM or SS (though SS on a CBE Fighter 1 / Hexblade Warlock can be pretty crazy).

[RulesJD]

What about Hexblade Warlocks / Sorlocks, Nuclear Wizards, Moon Druids utilizing summons, or even the old Polearm Master Sentinel Fighter or Barbarian? I think all of those things are better than GWM or SS (though SS on a CBE Fighter 1 / Hexblade Warlock can be pretty crazy).

"the easiest way"

That was my point. Hexblade's still don't do that much damage especially without SS/GWM. Spellcasting is a whole other ballgame. PAM/Xbow Expert are barely above a Monk using a Spear with two hands (d8) and making the free bonus attack (d4/6). Hell, in another thread I pointed out that one of the best DPR increases for a Monk is to take PAM.

Literally PAM is not better than GWM or SS. Not even clooooose. Smiting, Sneak Attack trickery (to get 2/round) and Spellcasting are the only real way to significantly out damage a Monk if you remove GWM and SS.

[Talsin]

That's sort of what we have, but the subclasses don't specialize strongly enough. That said, I think Sun Soul did a pretty good job customizing the Monk actually. It successfully added a scaling ranged attack dealing radiant damage and some AoE options. That archetype only needs one tweak: a regular bonus action ray attack.

That's definitely been an irk of mine, it makes sense to give them a bonus action ray...


The Monk is no exception. Open Hand, Shadow, and Four Elements are just Monks with some tricks that help sometimes, and most of those tricks compete with other Ki abilities. One of the reasons why people like Open Hand so much is because its features don't compete with what it normally does.

So then we'll dig deeper into these subclasses than the chassis to allow them to do more...

Instead of altering the Chassis, we can buff the Subclasses:

Open Hand: Damage on Strikes adds Wisdom to Flurry of Blows strikes. (This gives incentive to use flurry)
Shadow: If you have advantage on an attack from not being seen, add your martial die to the damage 1/turn. (Incentive for being more like an assassin)
Four Elements: Extra Ki = to 1/2 level, Elemental Attunement for free as a standalone, 1 additional discipline to take (total of 6), plus more discipline options that I'm not going to list right now (incentive to be more like a caster)
Drunken Master: When you take the Dodge Action, creatures within reach of you trigger opportunity attacks when attacking targets other than you. (Incentive for being a tank, could alternatively be like the "Protection" Fighting style instead.)
Kensei: Choice of Dueling, Archery, Two-weapon Fighting Fighting Style (Doesn't apply to unarmed strikes). )Incentive to use your weapon)
Sun Soul: Bonus Action for sun-bolt at Level 6 seem reasonable?

How's that?

[Nagog]

If you roll stats and roll well, you an just make a Monk 1 / Bladesinger Wizard and have up to 25AC while bladesinging naked. I don't think most tables roll for stats in 2019, and that's not something you can guarantee.

Additionally, the whole enforcing the number of short rests players can take - I can't say if it's common, but I've never seen it. It doesn't jive with the idea the the players are in charge of their own characters. You, the DM, are not the one trying to take a short rest. Therefore, you shouldn't decide when the players are allowed to do it. I think the separation between player choices and DM control is important enough to risk players unbalancing a game.



Agreed you can't guarantee it, but its possible. As for most tables rolling for stats, I have yet to meet a table that doesn't do that. Granted i don't play with Adventurer's League, so, yeah.

As for short rests, I guess the term "enforce" doesn't quite convey the point I was saying properly. Generally if the part is relatively inactive for an extended period, I'll have it count as a short rest. Typically an hour of light walking, 15 minutes of inactivity (like riding in a wagon or other transport), etc. Things that the typical human could do while still recuperating energy. If they want to do something during a short rest (ritual spells, prepare spells through Arcane Recovery, etc), I'll typically rule that they can't be walking around or anything, they actually need to sit and do that for their rest.

[Trickery]

That's definitely been an irk of mine, it makes sense to give them a bonus action ray...



So then we'll dig deeper into these subclasses than the chassis to allow them to do more...

Instead of altering the Chassis, we can buff the Subclasses:

Open Hand: Damage on Strikes adds Wisdom to Flurry of Blows strikes. (This gives incentive to use flurry)
Shadow: If you have advantage on an attack from not being seen, add your martial die to the damage 1/turn. (Incentive for being more like an assassin)
Four Elements: Extra Ki = to 1/2 level, Elemental Attunement for free as a standalone, 1 additional discipline to take (total of 6), plus more discipline options that I'm not going to list right now (incentive to be more like a caster)
Drunken Master: When you take the Dodge Action, creatures within reach of you trigger opportunity attacks when attacking targets other than you. (Incentive for being a tank, could alternatively be like the "Protection" Fighting style instead.)
Kensei: Choice of Dueling, Archery, Two-weapon Fighting Fighting Style (Doesn't apply to unarmed strikes). )Incentive to use your weapon)
Sun Soul: Bonus Action for sun-bolt at Level 6 seem reasonable?

How's that?

Would probably be better.

You might fix four elements just by reducing the ki cost to spell level for its spells and giving it a ki regeration ability it can use in combat.

Shadow, seems like this should have darkvision. But people seem to generally like Shadow, probably because of the teleport and theme.

That said, if we update the archetypes, I still think the Monk's MADness is a problem due to the way ASIs compete with feats this edition and how few players get. It takes level 16 for a Monk to max out its important attributes but only level 6 for a Fighter to do so and only level 8 for a Rogue. The Barbarian seemingly has the same problem except that it doesn't need maxed Con - its unarmored feature is a trap until high levels.

[Jamesps]

I've played in several games with monks and played a monk myself in tiers 1-3, and in none of the games was the monk the weakest character. In most of the higher level games the monk was the strongest martial character in combat utility.

I think one of the problems that people run into with assessing monks is that their role actually changes as they progress through their levels. Early on a monk is a glass cannon. They do a lot of damage but can't take much punishment. Fortunately they get a speed boost at level 2 that helps them stay out of trouble. Sure, they can't disengage like a rogue but they can inflict enough damage that they can just kill a weakened opponent and then move back a good portion of the time. That said, they probably are overall the weakest martial class at tier 1, sure.

Tier 2 they get stunning fist and can simply break boss encounters. You don't need maxed wisdom if you're forcing people to make 2-3 saves a round. If you're playing open hand monk you can actually force two saves a turn for a single point of ki, and you get a bonus attack on top of that. You'll get to shine in a few encounters per day and be kinda meh in the rest. That's a type of balance. Maybe not a type you'd like to play, but that's why there's options.

At Tier 3 Monks become the toughest characters to kill in the game and I'm including paladins. You get all saves and you can spend ki to reroll as if you had the lucky feat. This stacks with advantage. You're fast enough to skirmish with nigh-impunity, immune to poison (this comes up a lot), have a decent AC, evasion, and you can stun a lot of the major damage dealers to keep them from hurting you. Open hand even has a self-heal they can use in a pinch. If you build your character right you might not even be in sight of the enemies after you make your attack. I played in a tier 3 game with a tabaxi monk and he could solo some encounters simply by using his mobility. These were encounters that would have challenged the entire party if we'd shown up to them.

That same monk had to take down my bear barbarian on a few occasions due to mental domination. He didn't have to worry about being dominated himself, and he could take down anyone that did get dominated without issue. If you're willing to accept a slightly off-center set of tactics I think the tier 3 and 4 monk is the most powerful martial class in DnD.

[Keravath]

You know I've heard that there should be 2-3 rests per day, but I've never seen a DM actually enforce that. In my experience, players take short rests whenever they please, and it's difficult to stop them. I'm thinking more about difficult fights where you might drop three Ki points in one round and then be out.

To your second point, I'm not getting my information from novice players. If anything, novice players seem to like the Monk more than veterans. It's a common class I see both played by and recommended to new players due to its simplicity, straightforward playstyle, and the player's relative inability to make many mistakes in building a Monk (because they make few choices in the first place).

It isn't the DM enforcing the number of rests, it is the DM creating a narrative where the characters deal with one or two encounters in a day then head back to the inn because the long rest classes blew all their resources and thus want a long rest. You can also get parties where most of the characters are long rest resource based and when the monk says "lets take a short rest", the others just say "Nah, the rest of us are good to go so why bother?" (This can be driven by the players being fearful of the DM throwing in a random encounter so all the long rest classes get from the short rest is a greater risk of resource drain). So the party goes on to another encounter after which the long rest characters say "I've used 80% of my spell slots so lets call it a day" and the monk is left saying "Hey if we rest an hour I am good to go". So they don't take a short rest to avoid the possibility of a random encounter and instead head somewhere safe to long rest.

The DM needs to "manage" the narrative and expectations. The DM should avoid throwing in random encounters on every short rest. It is unrealistic and just discourages the players from taking them. The DM needs to add some time elements to the narrative so that bailing to rest the remaining part of the day and take a long rest after two encounters is likely to have some negative consequences for the characters or their mission. You are generally correct that it isn't the DM driving the short adventuring day, it is usually the players running long rest characters burning resources.

This can be mitigated in a dungeon crawl if there aren't good places to take a long rest for example and withdrawing from the dungeon is too onerous but that takes decent planning on the DMs part.

[Talsin]

You might fix four elements just by reducing the ki cost to spell level for its spells and giving it a ki regeration ability it can use in combat.

I considered this but the abilities the PHB offers seem lackluster and there have been a lot of reworks attempted that I think give it more freedom to span from a strict X-bender to feeling like the avatar. Plus, some ideas I had are more passive while others more active.


Shadow, seems like this should have darkvision. But people seem to generally like Shadow, probably because of the teleport and theme.

3_3 I hadn't realized they didn't get darkvision like a sorcerer or "Devil's Sight"... Darkvision at 3, up to Devil's Sight value at 11.

Also, I feel like giving a Fighting Style may not be right for the Kensei, it seems to make Longbow Kensei stupid good and overlap with the Parry bonus. Hmm...


That said, if we update the archetypes, I still think the Monk's MADness is a problem due to the way ASIs compete with feats this edition and how few players get. It takes level 16 for a Monk to max out its important attributes but only level 6 for a Fighter to do so and only level 8 for a Rogue. The Barbarian seemingly has the same problem except that it doesn't need maxed Con - its unarmored feature is a trap until high levels.

Another alternative might be to give them an additional ASI at 6 or 10. I don't think the buff's being suggested are really that far from being an ASI or a Feat equivalent.

[Trickery]

Another alternative might be to give them an additional ASI at 6 or 10. I don't think the buff's being suggested are really that far from being an ASI or a Feat equivalent.

Maybe so. That would be simpler than what I'm proposing and might solidify Monks as being a hybrid kind of a class.

As others have said, Monks are fine at high levels. The trouble is getting there plus the lack of customization due to MADness and fixed features.

[JNAProductions]

Your "fix" makes Monks entirely Dex-SAD, which loses a lot of the flavor of the Monk class.

Moreover, it makes them too powerful-Monks are (along with Paladins) one of the MADder classes in 5E. That's intentional-they've got enough abilities that are good enough that, if they were as SAD as a Rogue or a Wizard, they'd be TOO good.

[Trickery]

Your "fix" makes Monks entirely Dex-SAD, which loses a lot of the flavor of the Monk class.

Moreover, it makes them too powerful-Monks are (along with Paladins) one of the MADder classes in 5E. That's intentional-they've got enough abilities that are good enough that, if they were as SAD as a Rogue or a Wizard, they'd be TOO good.

I see the issue. People have wildly different experiences with the Monk class. The Monk at levels 1-4 is a completely different beast from levels 5-9, and then the Monk becomes an entire other thing after 14.

I would like to know what you mean by "too" good, though. Rogues are good, but not really able to break anything on their own. Wizards are excellent and definitely broken in the right hands. Paladins are strong at all levels at tanking, dealing burst damage, and off-healing, have better saves than the Monk prior to later levels, and break encounters any time they crit.

So, what is too good, exactly? How would a SAD Monk, with no other changes for the sake of argument, be too good? What would it do that was too good?

Edit: also, a Dex monk is a different flavor in my opinion. I don't think it makes the class any less than what it already is. Besides that, Monks get most of their more mystical features after level 10, and most of those features don't depend on high Wisdom.

[JNAProductions]

I see the issue. People have wildly different experiences with the Monk class. The Monk at levels 1-4 is a completely different beast from levels 5-9, and then the Monk becomes an entire other thing after 14.

I would like to know what you mean by "too" good, though. Rogues are good, but not really able to break anything on their own. Wizards are excellent and definitely broken in the right hands. Paladins are strong at all levels at tanking, dealing burst damage, and off-healing, have better saves than the Monk prior to later levels, and break encounters any time they crit.

So, what is too good, exactly? How would a SAD Monk, with no other changes for the sake of argument, be too good? What would it do that was too good?

Also, a Dex monk is a different flavor in my opinion. I don't think it makes the class any less than what it already is. Besides that, Monks get most of their more mystical features after level 10, and most of those features don't depend on high Wisdom.

Well, the main thing is that there'd be absolutely no tradeoff between damage, accuracy, and Stunning Strike DC.

And perhaps I was overly emphatic. 5E is roughly balanced-a tweak here or there won't BREAK the game. So, making Monks purely SAD probably won't break the game. But it will vault Monk to a top position.

Anecdotally, I've played Monks and never felt like I was lackluster, and my friend plays Monks all the time. While he does think that 4E Monks need some love, the core class never bothered him in the slightest.

[Trickery]

Well, the main thing is that there'd be absolutely no tradeoff between damage, accuracy, and Stunning Strike DC.

And perhaps I was overly emphatic. 5E is roughly balanced-a tweak here or there won't BREAK the game. So, making Monks purely SAD probably won't break the game. But it will vault Monk to a top position.

As I understand it, Monk players already level Dexterity instead of Wisdom first just about every time. Doing otherwise only seems to happen on niche builds, and there seems to be good reason for that.

If we were talking about choosing between attacks and the DC for spells, I'd agree. The problem is that we aren't. Stunning Strike is more like a battlemaster maneuver (both in usage and function) than a spell. Comparable spells are things like Hold Person which inflicts a far worse effect. Stunning Strike is closer to Menacing Attack than it is to any spell.

I also wonder about the idea of Monks being in a top position. If this were an MMO with tanks, healers, and dps with no DM, then that argument might bear more consideration. But D&D isn't that kind of game. Classes don't compete for a position in a group; they cooperate.

Furthermore, Monks don't compete with the other martial classes because they don't do what other martial classes do. They don't deal high damage, they aren't skill monkeys, they can't use other classes' armor and don't use many weapons. They're specialized for specific things - mostly dealing with casters and targets that are hard to get to.

Besides that, their class fantasy is unique. They aren't like rogues, fighters, and ranger's in that regard, any of whom might fit a wide variety of fantasy characters.

Unless Monk damage is seriously buffed or they gain many new abilities, it's unlikely they will be considered a replacement for any other martial character.

[RulesJD]

Your "fix" makes Monks entirely Dex-SAD, which loses a lot of the flavor of the Monk class.

Moreover, it makes them too powerful-Monks are (along with Paladins) one of the MADder classes in 5E. That's intentional-they've got enough abilities that are good enough that, if they were as SAD as a Rogue or a Wizard, they'd be TOO good.

Except Paladins MAD makes them naturally one of the best Multiclassed classes via Warlock/Sorcerer to instantly make up for any weaknesses they might otherwise have. Even just 1-2 levels of MC makes them disgustingly OP via Absorb Elements, Shield, cantrips, upcasted Smiting slots, etc.

Monks get no such thing. They definitely can get a decent boost via Fighting Styles or Hunter's Mark, but Cleric/Druid (Wisdom full casters) don't really offer much in terms of level dipping for Monks. They don't get the super strong level 1 spells (Shield/Absorb Ele), so a level 1-2 dip for Monk returns a lot less than for Paladin.

Paladins also start MAD, but they don't stay MAD. Paladins can increase their AC/Damage via any number of magic items (armor, shields, any weapon they want). Monks can kinda sorta increase damage via some of the short sword/staffs/daggers, but those pale in comparison. There are no magic items that boost Dex/Wisdom, unlike Paladins who can boost Str easily via Gauntlets/Belts.

[KorvinStarmast]

The main issues with monks are as follows:

1. No variety:

All monks are going to have dex 16, wis and con 14, with low other stats. They will have a 2 handed monk weapon that does 1d8 and unarmed for 1d4.

Nope.
My first D&D 5e Monk.
Wood Elf. Our party had no rogue.
Background was: Criminal.
16 Dex 16 Wis, Con 14.
The Long Bow Proficiency was kind of handy at low levels, given the gruelling / gritty world that our DM had in store for us.
Quarter Staff: surprisingly effective during low level melee.
Mask of the wild provided some attacks by a hidden attacker now and again, with my long bow, but it was sorta situational. Nice to have, but limited to certain terrain and situations.

Ki at level 2 made for a few chances to kite.

Open Hand at level 3 gave me the chances to knock enemies prone so our front liner could shred them.

At level 4 I had a tough choice to consider so I thought long and hard.
If I make the Wisdom 18, my next four levels have a higher "to save" DC so that some of the effects I try to apply work more often.
If I make Dexterity 18, I hit more often. And my bow shots hit more often.

I went with the higher wisdom.

Campaign went dormant around level six, so I am not sure if I made the right choice. (Our cleric was a bless bot for a lot of fights, to hit was rarely a problem)

[Trickery]

I'm glad I started this thread because I'm thinking more and more that the issue could be fixed with:

No Ki cost for Step of the Wind because I mean come on.
a bonus ASI at 6.
Tweaks to some of the subclasses.

Regular bonus action ray attack for sun soul.
Darkvision for shadow monks.
Four Elements probably needs a major rework since its abilities are expensive and often irrelevant. Not much to do about that.

[Daghoulish]

No Ki cost for Step of the Wind because I mean come on.

So, your just giving monk the goblin races cunning action lite? That seems like something you shouldn't do.

[Talsin]

Furthermore, Monks don't compete with the other martial classes because they don't do what other martial classes do. They don't deal high damage, they aren't skill monkeys, they can't use other classes' armor and don't use many weapons. They're specialized for specific things - mostly dealing with casters and targets that are hard to get to.

Unless Monk damage is seriously buffed or they gain many new abilities, it's unlikely they will be considered a replacement for any other martial character.

So if they aren't a replacement for a Martial Character - I would argue further. They aren't a replacement for any class. As you point out: They can't compete with martial classes in damage, or toughness. They don't compete on skills with Rogue, or Bard, Ranger or any other class that gives skills. They don't cast spells except for four-elements and even then it lacks both the utility and the power that other spellcasters can dish out. Overall, the Monk does not fit in these roles. That's the issue; it isn't specialized, and it carries no role to really shine in, nor would any role show off the monk without special treatment. It needs a buff.

[RulesJD]

I'm glad I started this thread because I'm thinking more and more that the issue could be fixed with:

No Ki cost for Step of the Wind because I mean come on.
a bonus ASI at 6.
Tweaks to some of the subclasses.

Regular bonus action ray attack for sun soul.
Darkvision for shadow monks.
Four Elements probably needs a major rework since its abilities are expensive and often irrelevant. Not much to do about that.



That wouldn't really help. For example:
Shadow Monks already get Darkvision. Just wake up 1 hour before the party ends its Long Rest. Punch yourself in the face (aka cast Darkvision) and then go back to sleep for an hour as a short rest to recharge your Ki. Tada.

[Talsin]

I'm glad I started this thread because I'm thinking more and more that the issue could be fixed with:

No Ki cost for Step of the Wind because I mean come on.
a bonus ASI at 6.
Tweaks to some of the subclasses.

Regular bonus action ray attack for sun soul.
Darkvision for shadow monks.
Four Elements probably needs a major rework since its abilities are expensive and often irrelevant. Not much to do about that.



I agree with Daghoulish on this one; no cost is too low. I think it needs a cost. Maybe 1 ki for 1 minute might be better without being TOO good.

[Talsin]

That wouldn't really help. For example:
Shadow Monks already get Darkvision. Just wake up 1 hour before the party ends its Long Rest. Punch yourself in the face (aka cast Darkvision) and then go back to sleep for an hour as a short rest to recharge your Ki. Tada.

Hmmm... Maybe Devil's Sight equivalent at Level 17 instead?

[Trickery]

I agree with Daghoulish on this one; no cost is too low. I think it needs a cost. Maybe 1 ki for 1 minute might be better without being TOO good.

Too good compared to what? Compared to the Rogue level 2 cunning action or the Goblin racial? No, it would be about equivalent to those.

Justify why the Monk's version of this feature has a ki cost. I'm not talking about Patient Defense, only the Dash and Disengage options. Monks also gain additional jump distance from it, but I can't imagine a situation where that would be a problem.


That wouldn't really help. For example:
Shadow Monks already get Darkvision. Just wake up 1 hour before the party ends its Long Rest. Punch yourself in the face (aka cast Darkvision) and then go back to sleep for an hour as a short rest to recharge your Ki. Tada.

Thanks for showing that the Shadow Monk can already do something kind of weird to have free Darkvision anyway. I now feel justified in just letting them have it.

[Daghoulish]

Too good compared to what? Compared to the Rogue level 2 cunning action or the Goblin racial? No, it would be about equivalent to those.

Justify why the Monk's version of this feature has a ki cost. I'm not talking about Patient Defense, only the Dash and Disengage options. Monks also gain additional jump distance from it, but I can't imagine a situation where that would be a problem.

Because why should monks have the exact same thing as rouges? That is a rogue ability that the monk can use for a cost, the cost is them being more like a rogue. There is a cost because otherwise what's the difference between monks and rogues?

[Trickery]

Because why should monks have the exact same thing as rouges? That is a rogue ability that the monk can use for a cost, the cost is them being more like a rogue. There is a cost because otherwise what's the difference between monks and rogues?

Why should Goblins and higher level Rangers have the exact same ability as rogues? Except not the exact same because rogues have the best version.

Why should Paladins and Rangers have the exact same fighting style feature as the Fighter? Except not the exact same because Fighters have all of the options and the other two only have some.

Why should Sorcerers and Wizards spend half of their time casting the exact same spells?

Making two classes able to do some of the same things does not mean those classes are stealing from each other.

[RulesJD]

Too good compared to what? Compared to the Rogue level 2 cunning action or the Goblin racial? No, it would be about equivalent to those.

Justify why the Monk's version of this feature has a ki cost. I'm not talking about Patient Defense, only the Dash and Disengage options. Monks also gain additional jump distance from it, but I can't imagine a situation where that would be a problem.



Thanks for showing that the Shadow Monk can already do something kind of weird to have free Darkvision anyway. I now feel justified in just letting them have it.

Fair, but my statement was rather than it will make practically no difference. Though I would like to point out that the Shadow Monk can already grant the entire party Darkvision for basically free already.

[Daghoulish]

Why should Goblins and higher level Rangers have the exact same ability as rogues? Except not the exact same because rogues have the best version.

Why should Paladins and Rangers have the exact same fighting style feature as the Fighter. Except not the exact same because Fighters have all of the options and the other two only have some.

That is not a reason to give monks a buff for no reason, I've played a monk and had no problem with it. Tell me why they need this buff because at the moment it seems like someone who's never played monk is theory crafting "fix's" with no basis on why they don't need the changes.

[Trickery]

That is not a reason to give monks a buff for no reason, I've played a monk and had no problem with it. Tell me why they need this buff because at the moment it seems like someone who's never played monk is theory crafting "fix's" with no basis on why they don't need the changes.

I have played a Monk and never used step of the wind because of the cost. It's not as good as bonus action dodge, flurry of blows, or stunning strike. That's why.

But no, that's not how it works. If everyone who got cantrips could cast them for free except for warlocks, we'd be wondering why warlocks had to spend resources to cast them. In this case with Step of the Wind, everyone who gets a comparable feature can use it without cost.

As for why buff monks, please review my opening post. Just because you think they're fine doesn't mean most people agree with you. Based on the data I've seen, most people think they're weak.

[Hail Tempus]

As for why buff monks, please review my opening post. Just because you think they're fine doesn't mean most people agree with you. Based on the data I've seen, most people think they're weak.The fact that a class is unpopular among players doesn’t mean that class is “weak.” Druids are one of the least popular classes, but no one with any experience playing 5e can reasonably argue that Druids are “weak” in combat.

And, honestly, only a very small percentage of players ever bother to sit down and research DPR numbers. Few players care that a monk does only 90% (or whatever) the damage of a fighter.

I think, more likely, is that the monk is a class that isn’t particularly friendly for more casual players. And the fluff around the class is a weird fit for the general D&D setting.

[Trickery]

The fact that a class is unpopular among players doesn’t mean that class is “weak.” Druids are one of the least popular classes, but no one with any experience playing 5e can reasonably argue that Druids are “weak” in combat.

And, honestly, only a very small percentage of players ever bother to sit down and research DPR numbers. Few players care that a monk does only 90% (or whatever) the damage of a fighter.

I think, more likely, is that the monk is a class that isn’t particularly friendly for more casual players. And the fluff around the class is a weird fit for the general D&D setting.

That's not why. The post I linked doesn't just show that the class is unpopular. One of rhe questions asked which is the weakest class mechanically. Monks ranked second with three times as many votes as the Fighter. Rangers won.

Monk is actually a very friendly class for new players when compared to any spellcaster. Some people think it's the easiest class to play because as long as you get your stats right, you can't make too many bad choices

Monks also got the second most votes for least favorite class, but I chalk that up to their theme, primarily. Many people don't enjoy an Eastern-themed martial artist in their D&D fantasy.

[Rerem115]

I feel like I'm a little late to the party, but my quick'n dirty Monk "fix" is to make them a long rest class. Triple normal Ki points, but only recharge on a long rest. It gives low level characters the option to nova harder, and makes them more able to cope with the 15 minute adventuring day.

[Hail Tempus]

That's not why. The post I linked doesn't just show that the class is unpopular. One of rhe questions asked which is the weakest class mechanically. Monks ranked second with three times as many votes as the Fighter. Rangers won. What does “weakest” mean in this context, other than lower DPR? Sure, I get that for players who want to squeeze every last point of damage out of a character, monks might not be their first choice. But, that’s not a measure that most players look at. My wife is a moderately experienced player, and she couldn’t care less that TWF is the less optimal choice. She just wanted to play a character who was a dashing swordswoman.


Monk is actually a very friendly class for new players when compared to any spellcaster. Some people think it's the easiest class to play because as long as you get your stats right, you can't make too many bad choices Monks are tough for new players because the learning curve is painful. Inexperienced players will see their character spending a lot of time face down until they come to the realization that a monk shouldn’t spend too much time near enemies, other than when hitting them.

And I don’t think people agonize too much about what to do with their ASIs. That comes up twice in most characters’ careers. It’s just not a big part of the game experience.


Monks also got the second most votes for least favorite class, but I chalk that up to their theme, primarily. Many people don't enjoy an Eastern-themed martial artist in their D&D fantasy. There seems to be several issues as to why players don’t pick monks. And I’m not convinced that tweaking their abilities or buffing their damage slightly would make any real difference.

[Talsin]

Too good compared to what? Compared to the Rogue level 2 cunning action or the Goblin racial? No, it would be about equivalent to those.

Justify why the Monk's version of this feature has a ki cost. I'm not talking about Patient Defense, only the Dash and Disengage options. Monks also gain additional jump distance from it, but I can't imagine a situation where that would be a problem.


It's too good in the sense that it gives the class that already competes for "Fastest Class" even more speed. I don't think having a more-or-less endless supply of double-dash is a good idea.
Oh, it also gives Drunken Master +10 feet of movement in using the disengage option... Hmm...

While I do think 1Ki for 1 round is too expensive compared to other uses of Ki, I think 1 Ki for 1 minute is fine. It's less time than expeditious retreat (1st level spell), but has greater utility with Disengage and the value that has to a frontline-ish type.

[Zetakya]

I have played a Monk and never used step of the wind because of the cost. It's not as good as bonus action dodge, flurry of blows, or stunning strike. That's why.

But no, that's not how it works. If everyone who got cantrips could cast them for free except for warlocks, we'd be wondering why warlocks had to spend resources to cast them. In this case with Step of the Wind, everyone who gets a comparable feature can use it without cost.

As for why buff monks, please review my opening post. Just because you think they're fine doesn't mean most people agree with you. Based on the data I've seen, most people think they're weak.

Step of the Wind is irreplaceable for when you want to be able to run at ~25 miles an hour and jump small buildings in a single bound.

As for why it costs more than the Rogue equivalent - it doesn't. Monk gets the Rogue level of ability as an always on class feature without having to even use an action to do it thanks to Unarmoured Movement. Step of the wind has an activation cost because it further multiplies this.

The real problem with Step of the Wind is that jumping is Strength based, and Monks should really get an ability that lets them make Athletics checks as Dexterity based.

[Trickery]

Step of the Wind is irreplaceable for when you want to be able to run at ~25 miles an hour and jump small buildings in a single bound.

As for why it costs more than the Rogue equivalent - it doesn't. Monk gets the Rogue level of ability as an always on class feature without having to even use an action to do it thanks to Unarmoured Movement. Step of the wind has an activation cost because it further multiplies this.

The real problem with Step of the Wind is that jumping is Strength based, and Monks should really get an ability that lets them make Athletics checks as Dexterity based.

Unarmored movement increases the Monk's speed by 10. It doesn't go up to 30, a double dash, until level 18. By that point, nobody cares how fast anyone else is.

Step of the Wind isn't the ludicrous burst of speed people seem to think that it is. A Grassland Druid can apply Haste and Longstrider to an ally at level 5 giving that person an effective movement speed of 240' if they do nothing but dash, or 300' if the target is a rogue. That's a ludicrous speed burst. In contrast, using Step of the Wind results in up to 80-90 feet of total movement for the cost of a bonus action for most of the Monk's leveling career.

But Haste and Longstrider are spells!

Yeah, no kidding. That doesn't mean they should be three times as effective at movement as a dedicated Monk. And the Monk already has to spend resources to hit those speeds. That means they lose a footrace to a Rogue for most of their career - hardly a dedicated speedster. If the Rogue is an Arcane Trickster, the Monk will ALWAYS lose a foot race.

So this isn't broken. I don't think there's any debate to be had here, and I'm beyond surprised that this, of all things, has turned into a sticking point.

[diplomancer]

My first 5e character was a Ghostwise Halfling Shadow Monk. I only played him until level 6, but nowhere did I feel underpowered compared to the rest of the party (a Fighter, a Wizard, a Bard, and a Rogue)
At the very first encounter I remember my DM being impressed "wow, I didn't know you could do that much damage". Later, the Assassin really enjoyed my enabling his assassinations thanks to Pass Without Trace (I chose my character last of that party, a shadow monk seemed to fit exactly right). Finally, in what was the last battle of our short campaign (and when the fighter player was not available) I tanked pretty well an encounter with a demon thanks to Patient Defense.
Then the DM moved out and the campaign stopped, but I never, at any moment, felt like I was underpowered compared to my companions.

I suppose that at later levels the damage might fall off abruptly compared to Fighters with SS/GWM, or Paladins. But at early levels? Solid class.

[Talsin]

Unarmored movement increases the Monk's speed by 10. It doesn't go up to 30, a double dash, until level 18. By that point, nobody cares how fast anyone else is.

Step of the Wind isn't the ludicrous burst of speed people seem to think that it is. A Grassland Druid can apply Haste and Longstrider to an ally at level 5 giving that person an effective movement speed of 240' if they do nothing but dash, or 300' if the target is a rogue. That's a ludicrous speed burst. In contrast, using Step of the Wind results in up to 80-90 feet of total movement for the cost of a bonus action for most of the Monk's leveling career.

But Haste and Longstrider are spells!

Yeah, no kidding. That doesn't mean they should be three times as effective at movement as a dedicated Monk. And the Monk already has to spend resources to hit those speeds. That means they lose a footrace to a Rogue for most of their career - hardly a dedicated speedster. If the Rogue is an Arcane Trickster, the Monk will ALWAYS lose a foot race.

So this isn't broken. I don't think there's any debate to be had here, and I'm beyond surprised that this, of all things, has turned into a sticking point.

Monk using Dash alone will match the speed of a rogue at level 6 (45 + dash for 45 more vs 30+30+30). At 10th Level, they surpass rogues (50+50) until level 13 where the arcane trickster beats them out at 120ft/round by using haste a third level spell, and only for 1 minute at per casting. But if a monk uses Ki at 13th level (when AT can go faster) it will outpace it by 30ft/round for the 10 rounds given from Haste, doesn't have to miss a round from Haste's effects, then can run for 3 more rounds like that before kicking down and having to rest it out at a casual 100ft/round. FROM LEVEL 6 TO 13, the Monk is the fastest hombre out there WITHOUT using a bonus-action dash OR HASTE. Oh, and Monk's catch up at level 18 like you said. I missed the part in haste where movement speed is doubled. Arcane Trickster is WAY faster.

-_-

Yes, this is a silly sticking point, because the ability to Dash on a bonus action isn't exactly needed on a Monk. What about Disengage? I think that's a pretty nice value, and I could see being able to do it as a major boon. That seems like the cost would be worth it, given the crappier AC and HD compared to non-rogue frontliners. Like I said above, I think a cost is reasonable, though for 1 round is a little short on duration-value.

Despite the tone I may have taken, I really do enjoy discussing mechanics and reworking class value, especially with people who want to go in depth like @Trickery and others do.

[Amechra]

If anything, the Monk could be faster. I want to be able to handle overland travel by jogging. :smallwink:

I will agree that I'd like to see a little more customization, but I don't think chopping up Diamond Soul is the solution. I'd love to see them get Expertise picks, with the option to expand your Monk weapons instead of boosting a skill (Kensei restrictions plus improvised weapons¹.) Not sure where to put them, though...

---

To throw in my two cents: I played a Kenku Drunken Monk from 5th to 14th level a few months back. I never felt particularly weak - granted, we were low-op, but her damage was consistent (3-4 attacks per round means that I don't have to worry about missing as much) and Stunning Strike outright trivialized some of fights we got into.

Honestly, though, the fact that GWM and SS weren't on the table helped that¹.

¹ In my opinion, Great Weapon Master, Hexblade's Curse, and Sharpshooter are all options that shouldn't have been added to the game in the first place - doubly so for Hexblade's Curse, because it has unintended consequences (Nuclear Wizards come to mind).

[Nagog]

So, your just giving monk the goblin races cunning action lite? That seems like something you shouldn't do.

I mean considering Rogues get a version of it at level 2, and Monk is more likely to be used to build a Mobile Skirmisher, I think it's a great idea. Frankly having to choose between getting an extra unarmed strike from Flurry or using any of the other ki abilities was never even a thought in my mind. I think I used Patient Defense once while I was surrounded by enemy monks, but that's about it. It simply isn't worth a Ki point, and is more likely to be worth a 2 level dip in Rogue to pick up for the Mobile Skirmisher.

[Nagog]

That is not a reason to give monks a buff for no reason, I've played a monk and had no problem with it. Tell me why they need this buff because at the moment it seems like someone who's never played monk is theory crafting "fix's" with no basis on why they don't need the changes.

Monks are easily my favorite class thematically. I don't typically hold people to the Eastern theme, so it opens up a lot of fun possibilities thematically, however as a class, the biggest draw to them over any other martial class is scaling Unarmed Strike damage, and to a similar extend, Flurry of Blows. As of current, there is no real appeal to using Step of the Wind instead of Flurry. The enemy can't hit you with an AoO if they're dead. And odds are you have more movement than you need, so when they're dead, use your plentiful movement to get where you need to go. Removing the cost of Step of the Wind means you don't have to feel you're wasting a use of Flurry to walk away from an enemy safely, or wasting a Flurry to get somewhere a bit quicker than you would otherwise.


What does “weakest” mean in this context, other than lower DPR? Sure, I get that for players who want to squeeze every last point of damage out of a character, monks might not be their first choice. But, that’s not a measure that most players look at. My wife is a moderately experienced player, and she couldn’t care less that TWF is the less optimal choice. She just wanted to play a character who was a dashing swordswoman.

Monks are tough for new players because the learning curve is painful. Inexperienced players will see their character spending a lot of time face down until they come to the realization that a monk shouldn’t spend too much time near enemies, other than when hitting them.

And I don’t think people agonize too much about what to do with their ASIs. That comes up twice in most characters’ careers. It’s just not a big part of the game experience.

There seems to be several issues as to why players don’t pick monks. And I’m not convinced that tweaking their abilities or buffing their damage slightly would make any real difference.

Monk is the second class I ever played, and the first class I ever played correctly (First was a really botched Wizard and almost made me give up on Table Top games forever). The learning curve isn't difficult, unless you're comparing it to the most basic fighter, in which you just learn "You have abilities you can use a few times a day". As for their weakness, I feel it comes in their scaling. As has been stated before, early game Monks are fine. Great, even. However, as they level they begin to fizzle out. Lack of magic items, lack of rechargeability, etc. make them quick candidates to multiclass out of, if you can. I mean, when you think of classes that need short rests, the two that immediately come to mind are Warlocks and Paladins. That's usually where people stop listing, because who actually plays a Monk in a higher level game?


Monk using Dash alone will match the speed of a rogue at level 6 (45 + dash for 45 more vs 30+30+30). At 10th Level, they surpass rogues (50+50) until level 13 where the arcane trickster beats them out at 120ft/round by using haste a third level spell, and only for 1 minute at per casting. But if a monk uses Ki at 13th level (when AT can go faster) it will outpace it by 30ft/round for the 10 rounds given from Haste, doesn't have to miss a round from Haste's effects, then can run for 3 more rounds like that before kicking down and having to rest it out at a casual 100ft/round. FROM LEVEL 6 TO 13, the Monk is the fastest hombre out there WITHOUT using a bonus-action dash OR HASTE. Oh, and Monk's catch up at level 18 like you said.

-_-

Yes, this is a silly sticking point, because the ability to Dash on a bonus action isn't exactly needed on a Monk. What about Disengage? I think that's a pretty nice value, and I could see being able to do it as a major boon. That seems like the cost would be worth it, given the crappier AC and HD compared to non-rogue frontliners. Like I said above, I think a cost is reasonable, though for 1 round is a little short on duration-value.

Despite the tone I may have taken, I really do enjoy discussing mechanics and reworking class value, especially with people who want to go in depth like @Trickery and others do.

I also enjoy debating mechanics, as long as it's in a friendly and open manner. :) All in all, I don't particularly see a problem with Monks being the fastest moving class in the game. I mean as is, how frequently does movement speed come into play in a way that breaks the game? If you have an enemy that's fleeing to warn a larger group, the Monk could use this to catch up and grapple them to prevent escape. That's not broken, that's a class being used to it's fullest. Mobility is already one of the greatest strengths of the Monk, in a similar way to how Rangers are strong in Exploration, except Movement comes up a tad bit more often. (meaning it comes up at all)

[Yakmala]

Monks rank as one of the worst classes mechanically and one of players' least favorite classes. They aren't quite as hated as the Ranger, but they may be even less optimal in play at most levels.

Do they start out a bit slow? Sure.

But flawed? Weak? Are you kidding?

Back when I was running my SKT campaign, I had two monks in my party, One Open Hand and the other Drunken Master. They were, by far, the most disruptive forces in the game. Every major threat was constantly stunned or prone or getting knocked back. Even the really big bads with legendary saves could not keep up with the Monk's ability to lock them down.

I also play a Monk, in my case he's a Way of the Long Death Monk. And at 13, he's harder to kill than my level 20 Battle Master.

Yes, they are a bit MAD. Some of their sub-classes are sub-optimal. And there's not a lot of useful magic items for them.

But played correctly, they are game changers. And also a lot of fun!

[Trickery]

Do they start out a bit slow? Sure.

But flawed? Weak? Are you kidding?

Back when I was running my SKT campaign, I had two monks in my party, One Open Hand and the other Drunken Master. They were, by far, the most disruptive forces in the game. Every major threat was constantly stunned or prone or getting knocked back. Even the really big bads with legendary saves could not keep up with the Monk's ability to lock them down.

I also play a Monk, in my case he's a Way of the Long Death Monk. And at 13, he's harder to kill than my level 20 Battle Master.

Yes, they are a bit MAD. Some of their sub-classes are sub-optimal. And there's not a lot of useful magic items for them.

But played correctly, they are game changers. And also a lot of fun!

It depends on the level you play them. At high levels, Monks are sufficiently different from other martials and have enough Ki to do their thing. At low levels, they don't have the features to keep up with other martials. That said, I think the tweaks I proposed earlier would do the trick.

But Monks as game changers? Maybe in some cases. But not as much of a game changer as an optimized Barbarian or Paladin or, God forbid, a clever Wizard. And the buffs I'm proposing (recent post about step of the wind and small tweaks) won't amount to much change and would mostly affect those low levels.

[Evaar]

Some posts in this thread suggest Monks are fine early game, but fail to keep up late game.

Others say just the opposite, that they struggle early but find a suitable niche later.

Which of those is true, if either? If we can't nail that down, I'm not sure how to imagine solutions.

If the former is true, I might suggest a feature unlocked at the middle levels (maybe 8 or 10) that removes the Ki cost from Step of the Wind and/or Patient Defense. That doesn't make them "free" due to the opportunity cost of using a bonus action, and a Monk always has a use for a bonus action so it's felt more keenly here than even with the Rogue. But a Monk holding back offensively and just focusing on dodging attacks seems extremely thematic, and I'm not sure why it really needs Ki expenditure later on. You wouldn't want to just remove the cost altogether, as that would just incentivize Monk dips for everyone else.

[Misterwhisper]

Some posts in this thread suggest Monks are fine early game, but fail to keep up late game.

Others say just the opposite, that they struggle early but find a suitable niche later.

Which of those is true, if either? If we can't nail that down, I'm not sure how to imagine solutions.

If the former is true, I might suggest a feature unlocked at the middle levels (maybe 8 or 10) that removes the Ki cost from Step of the Wind and/or Patient Defense. That doesn't make them "free" due to the opportunity cost of using a bonus action, and a Monk always has a use for a bonus action so it's felt more keenly here than even with the Rogue. But a Monk holding back offensively and just focusing on dodging attacks seems extremely thematic, and I'm not sure why it really needs Ki expenditure later on. You wouldn't want to just remove the cost altogether, as that would just incentivize Monk dips for everyone else.

The difference is if you play mainly offense or defense.

At very early levels monks already have a bonus action attack that adds their stat for free.

That is amazing offensively early game.

However every offensive build will have a bonus action attack if they want one by level 4. That means that the monk even out mostly.

Later in the game when other players have magic weapons, the monk can’t get one with bonuses on it for unarmed, and they get no fighting style, and their only real option is melee.

By mid level you are just a stunning strike machine with a lot of mobility to get in and stun who you want.

Later still their defense gets even better with all good saves and empty body but their offense is the same as level 5.

However defensively the monk can never wear armor with an actual bonus and can never use a shield.

No adamantine armors, no armors with resistances or other special abilities.

Best you can hope for is bracers of armor but good luck every getting those over the caster in the group.

I never got the point of all the uses of step of the wind or patient defense, cutting your offense in half and letting the enemy go on their turn is not worth it.

Stunning strike is just so strong of a feature that monks have to be toned down on everything else to make up for it.

[False God]

Meh, I never have any trouble with Monks. Maybe using the standard array or point-buy causes this problem but with 3 or 4d6 I almost always have an 18 for Dex or Wis and a 16 that can get upgraded to a 18 with racial mods. Sure my other stats might suck but who cares? I'm generally sitting at a 17-18 AC, with +7 to hit (+5 Dex, +2 Prof) and dealing fairly good damage on a regular basis. Having, on average, something around a 35% chance to miss. Which seems reasoanble. 5E critters are super easy to hit.

TAD is not MAD. TAD, frankly, is ideal and how most classes should be designed IMO.

As a response to your adjustments, I think making the Monk reliant on Dex only really takes away something from the class. They're Monks, not punchy-rogues.

[Dork_Forge]

It depends on the level you play them. At high levels, Monks are sufficiently different from other martials and have enough Ki to do their thing. At low levels, they don't have the features to keep up with other martials. That said, I think the tweaks I proposed earlier would do the trick.

But Monks as game changers? Maybe in some cases. But not as much of a game changer as an optimized Barbarian or Paladin or, God forbid, a clever Wizard. And the buffs I'm proposing (recent post about step of the wind and small tweaks) won't amount to much change and would mostly affect those low levels.

I'm not seeing the lack of options at low levels? Monk level ups are crammed to the point where at early levels you essentially get two abilities a level:


Level 1: Martial Arts and Unarmored Defense
Level 2: Flurry of Blows, Patient Defense, Step of the Wind, Unarmored movement 10ft
Level 3: Subclass abiltiies and deflect missiles
Level 4: ASI AND Slow Fall
Level 5: Extra Attack AND Stunning Strike


Combine that with every level gains another ki point and I'm not seeing an issue with their features (most of which are not ki dependent)?

They gain unlimited BA attacks (compare to War Cleric where it's limited PER DAY, Berserker Barbarian where it's per rage and the privilege costs you a level of exhaustion or TWF that restricts your weapons and doesn't add your mod by standard) and lots of little benefits like not needing to care about armor and can use their body to attack with (from 5th onwards) weapon equivalent damage, meaning Monks are always ready, they can't be disarmed, they can't be made vulnerable (like most other classes) and for those reasons also excel at infilitration.

The only way I see a monk struggle is when they don't get enough short rests and that is an issue that would also affect Warlocks, Fighters and to an extent Wizards.

[Trickery]

I'm not seeing the lack of options at low levels? Monk level ups are crammed to the point where at early levels you essentially get two abilities a level:


Level 1: Martial Arts and Unarmored Defense
Level 2: Flurry of Blows, Patient Defense, Step of the Wind, Unarmored movement 10ft
Level 3: Subclass abiltiies and deflect missiles
Level 4: ASI AND Slow Fall
Level 5: Extra Attack AND Stunning Strike


Combine that with every level gains another ki point and I'm not seeing an issue with their features (most of which are not ki dependent)?

They gain unlimited BA attacks (compare to War Cleric where it's limited PER DAY, Berserker Barbarian where it's per rage and the privilege costs you a level of exhaustion or TWF that restricts your weapons and doesn't add your mod by standard) and lots of little benefits like not needing to care about armor and can use their body to attack with (from 5th onwards) weapon equivalent damage, meaning Monks are always ready, they can't be disarmed, they can't be made vulnerable (like most other classes) and for those reasons also excel at infilitration.

The only way I see a monk struggle is when they don't get enough short rests and that is an issue that would also affect Warlocks, Fighters and to an extent Wizards.

It's only in play that you encounter the issues. They die quite easily if the player isn't careful, they don't do as much damage as you expect, and they run out of Ki much more quickly than it seems like they should. As I said, they get much better at high levels. It's low levels where they struggle compared to other martials.

[Talionis]

If I were to make a change. I would give Monks and Barbs more ASI like Rogue and Fighter.

[Misterwhisper]

If I were to make a change. I would give Monks and Barbs more ASI like Rogue and Fighter.

I would be happy if monks actually got a fighting style first.
Rogue’s too if gated into a subclass.

I greatly bothered me when blades bards got fighting styles and rogues didn’t, MM even kept calling them swashbucklers in play test because they are just a swashbuckler ripoff.

[Dork_Forge]

It's only in play that you encounter the issues. They die quite easily if the player isn't careful, they don't do as much damage as you expect, and they run out of Ki much more quickly than it seems like they should. As I said, they get much better at high levels. It's low levels where they struggle compared to other martials.

My post was addressing early levels, the ki points again being a short rest dependent mechanic, if you're not getting enough short rests, you'll sufffer like Fighters and Warlocks, if you try and use ki abilities every turn (or multiple time per turn) then expect to run out quickly (like a Battlemaster using a maneuver on every attack). As for durability they're on par with Rogues but with a superior AC (you don't have uncanny dodge, but you have the option of disengaging or dodging) and a lot of survivability comes from the subclasses: Want to be an AC tank and churn out more damage? Go Kensei. Want to control the battlefield and be more of a hit point sponge? Then go Open Hand. Monks are meant to be a hit and run class and if you forget the run part of it then you're obviously not going to do as well as classes with bigger hit dies that are meant to take a beating (unless you make more of an effort to pump Con, take Tough or something similar).

[McSkrag]

I don't see a problem with monks.

I've seen a lot of players having a great time playing monks. In my experience they are extremely effective in and out of combat.

As a DM I have a lot of problems trying to deal with monks especially when they are higher level.

[Trickery]

I don't see a problem with monks.

I've seen a lot of players having a great time playing monks. In my experience they are extremely effective in and out of combat.

As a DM I have a lot of problems trying to deal with monks especially when they are higher level.

Again, experiences differ. But I don't think Monks need a major rework or any changes at high levels so much as small tweaks to address glaring issues.

MADness causing a lack of choices is one: address with one bonus ASI.

Step of the Wind shouldn't have a cost since cunning action, the goblin racial, and vanish are free.

Some subclasses need small tweaks, like a regular bonus action ray for Sun Soul.

Four elements probably should be tossed.

Honestly, I think that would do it. Step of the Wind being free would help Monks a lot from 2-5 without affecting levels beyond 10 by very much.

[darknite]

Have you seen a monk of 14+ level? They break encounters - "I roll a 24 initiative, run 100' on the ceiling over the BBG's protective minions, hit four times and stun them before they can do a thing..."

[MrStabby]

Monks in the campaigns I have run have been some of the most powerful characters, at least until high level spells come along.

I would suggest more emphasis be placed on a few points though:

1) Monk is MAD but it desired high wisdom and dex. These are good stats to want high anyway. A paladin leans more towards strength and cha - charisma is a less common save than wisdom and strength a less common save than dexterity. Your dex gives you both great melee and ranged abilities.

2) Mobility IS important; initiative is important. If you want to compare monk damage to fighter damage (with a big weapon) then factor in that the monk is more likely to get an extra round of combat than the fighter as they are likely to have higher initiative. Factor in that the monk is more likely to be fighting for more turns as they are less likely to need to take the dash action to close to make melee attacks. If you happen to forget about these things then you are doing the monk down.

3) What you kill/neutralise is important. Reaching and killing the glass cannon is more important than slugging through a meat shield

4) Monks actually do good damage early on. Bonus action attacks with no feat investment is pretty good. Later on, monks are even better as their control abilities are more important than raw damage.

5) Monk AC doesn't matter. What matters is the AC of the person taking the attacks. If the monk is out of reach and enemies attack the fighter in full plate, then it is the fighter AC that matters not the monk's

6) This is the big one. Players don't see what didn't happen. A monk's power is a lot about control. Their effect is about stopping the enemy. You never really get to see what doesn't happen. You stun the wizard and you never get to see the hold person spell that was going to hit 4 party members or the cone of cold or whatever.

If you ignore all these and only have four fights per long rest then yeah, the monk does look bad -of course it does. If you give no weight to subclass abilities like the shadow monk silence spell or long death's temp HP then sure, it isn't going to look good. It turns out ignoring abilities makes classes look less good than they are.

As a DM, it takes a pretty concerted effort to impact the monk. A few casters with counterspell will slow wizards down, a hold person or hypnotic pattern will slow most barbarians... the monk that can stun the casters, not be caught by melee and constantly end up in cover to thwart archers or other spellcasters is pretty free to do their thing. Not impossible, to inhibit, but just much less naturally frequent.

[McSkrag]

Have you seen a monk of 14+ level? They break encounters - "I roll a 24 initiative, run 100' on the ceiling over the BBG's protective minions, hit four times and stun them before they can do a thing..."

Exactly. And that's just a baseline monk. You add subclass abilities and magic items and they are even harder to stop.

And woe to the DM that lets a monk fly - which I've come up against in AL play. You'll have to make a deal with Asmodeus, nice guy BTW, to take them down.

[Frozenstep]

I feel like monk is a class that has a lot of tools for a lot of situations, but...


They can only put out what a DM puts into the encounter
The player still needs to know their tools and when to use them
The magic item issue


So first, monk has a lot of value as this highly mobile class that can get to backline enemies quickly and start threatening them, potentially forcing ranged units to disengage or risk a stun when they move away. They can do this in situations other classes couldn't with their increased movement, jump distance, and ability to slow fall to bypass all sorts of obstacles to hopefully stay out of range of enemy melee units while getting to enemy ranged units. When enemy ranged units target him, he's got an answer with deflect missiles, and then eventually has answers to casters that use charm, fear, or dexterity saving throw damage spells at level 7, and even before then should have the stats to help against those kinds of saving throws.

He can start forcing ranged units out of cover, force enemy melee units to run back to deal with him potentially causing opportunity attacks or turns spent not attacking, (and then escape with his mobility/disengaging), and just generally be a disruption that lets the party avoid simply trading hits with the enemy.

But if the DM doesn't have ranged units that can be disrupted, if there aren't obstacles to bypass to do that, if the enemies aren't making use of cover, etc, then you don't see this value. If the DM just has a bunch of monsters on an open field without making use of cover, if there aren't even any enemies that are primarily ranged, no glass cannon enemies in difficult positions, then a monk doesn't look valuable because their toolkit isn't great at slugging it out in melee. The best monk can do in that situation is either pick up mobile or get a disengage with something like open hand stealing reactions or drunken master or shadow's darkness so they can hit and run and tempt a monster to take an opportunity attack from another melee ally to come deal with them.

Then, of course, even if a DM does include these things, it doesn't mean the players will use it. If a player uses the monk as a close range slugger, they don't get value out of most of their features.

Then there's the magic item issue. Not being able to use magical armor is a loss, but an acceptable one. Not getting their magic weapons value on their martial arts is a bigger loss. A generic +x to unarmed attacks item would be a huge help. If instruments of the bards are allowed to exist, I don't see why monk doesn't have a few specific magic items that target them.

[stoutstien]

I played with making the Monk and encounter based class versus short rest. so instead of recovery Ki on short rest and recover Ki every time they roll initiative.
I haven't found the sweet spot for how much ki they get and 4ele monks need to be turned in to a 1/3 caster like AT or EK but I like the overall concept.

Currently working on shadow monks which is an interesting case.
So far I've turned darkvision into a ritual like casting and made pass without a trace free once a S/L rest.
Silence or darkness can be cast once a fight.

At this point it a whole different class but reduces the need for SR if they are the only member of the party that needs them.

Or you can just multiply all the ki by 3 per level and make them are recovered on a LR

[Gryndle]

Many have pointed out that the Monk is a flawed class. According to several surveys, including this one (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?592452-Dnd-5e-questionnaire-Answers), Monks rank as one of the worst classes mechanically and one of players' least favorite classes. They aren't quite as hated as the Ranger, but they may be even less optimal in play at most levels. While the Ranger gets a lot of power early on that allows it to keep up in combat, the Monk does not. You can do your own analysis on this if you like, but it's not needed. Here's one source that shows how the Monk compares to other martials for damage at most levels (external link): https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/4cg25y/a_dpr_analysis_of_the_martial_classes_levels_111/.

As many have noted, the Monk trades damage for mobility, evasiveness, and Ki abilities. Unfortunately, most of these abilities are barely usable at low levels due to Ki progression. Additionally, the Monk has hit points comparable to a Rogue but fewer options for avoiding damage. They don't get Uncanny Dodge like the Rogue does.

Worst of all, Monks suffer from MADness. For those who don't know, MAD stands for Multi-Attribute Dependence. Monk attacks are based on Dexterity, their Ki saving throw is based on Wisdom, and their armor is based on both.

This is the biggest limiting factor of the class. If a Monk takes any feats, they will be sub-optimal for one or both of their main statistics for most of their leveling career. In fact, a Monk cannot hit 20 AC and max out both Wisdom and Dexterity before level 16.

Due to this and their features being fixed with no options, Monks have few choices to make.

I think their multi-attribute dependence is the main problem with the Monk class. The abilities are flavorful, if narrow, but the Monk cannot make good use of them until later levels as written. I think Monks would be better off if they were dependent only on their Dexterity. That would allow them to max out their primary attribute by level 8, similar to a Rogue or Fighter, and would allow them to take more feats.

One way to change Monk might be:

Ki saving throw changed to use Dexterity.
Unarmored Defense changed to be 10 + DEX + Proficiency, AC range = 15 to 21 (old was 16 to 20)
Change Diamond Soul to something the Monk gets every four levels, choosing one saving throw in which to gain proficiency each time.
Total Ki pool = proficiency * 3.

Between Diamond Soul and SADness, the Monk would have at least five more choices to make over the course of its career (two feats, three diamond soul choices before fourth is fixed). Sure, Constitution and Wisdom would usually be the optimal choices to get first with Diamond Soul, but not always. Additionally, Monks would have far more Ki to use at low levels when the class struggles to contribute, but wouldn't be much changed at high levels with this Ki formula.

What do you think? Should Monks be MAD as they are now, and is it fine for the class to have so few choices to make? Are you fine with Monks starting off so weak but turning into Ki batteries by high levels? If so, is some other problem at the core of why the class is considered weak?

Have you actually seen many monks in play? I am a huge fan of the monk class, it is actually my favorite. They are fine the way they are. The only thing I would change is allowing their Missile deflection ability to be used against melee attacks as well. But even that is more flavor for me (as most of the best practical self defense techniques I know are heavily "counter-strike" based), and not necessarily power based.

They do very well at what they are intended for....fast moving skirmishers with elements of control. The monk class only falls flat when people try to play them like front line tanks or nukers and spend their ki like crazy. So basically it comes down to this: monks are solid when you play them as the role for which they were intended and designed for, and they are weak when you try to play them in roles that they were NOT intended or designed for. And in that regard they make horrible spell casters too...oh nooooooo

[darknite]

It's only in play that you encounter the issues. They die quite easily if the player isn't careful, they don't do as much damage as you expect, and they run out of Ki much more quickly than it seems like they should. As I said, they get much better at high levels. It's low levels where they struggle compared to other martials.

That's a player issue, not a class issue. It's true that you need to tend to your lower level monk carefully because they can be fragile. But their power curve just keeps ramping up as they level, more Ki, good abilities at just about every level - it doesn't take that long to be immune to poison & disease, have Evasion, be proficient in every save, leave warp trails as you scoot around the battlefield and lock down the most dangerous opponents, etc.

[Trickery]

I updated the opening post to address some of the recent comments. People seem to be arguing with an idea that no one actually holds.

In summary: everyone agrees that high-level Monks are strong. There is absolutely no debate in this thread, or elsewhere that I've seen, about whether Monks are viable in tiers 3 and 4. We all agree that they are.

The debate is primarily over whether the subclasses are perfect (probably best left to separate threads about specific subclasses) and whether the Monk needs tweaks in tier 1 and tier 2.

It's important to remember that tiers 1 and 2 are more important than later tiers. This is because most play takes place in tiers 1 and 2. Games are disproportionately likely to start at level 1 and seldom go on long enough for players to get into the later tiers. Additionally, many DMs don't feel comfortable enough with the rules and monsters to run high-level games; low-level games are far less intimidating. Thus most people's opinions of a class are heavily, if not entirely, based upon how that class performs at low levels.

That's probably why Monks frequently get low ratings from players andd were rated the second weakest class mechanically (see the OP). I believe that sentiment came from low-level play, not high-level play.

My stance is that the Monk is fine except for Step of the Wind (should be free) and needing a bonus ASI at level 6 (for character customization so not all ASIs go to stats). Make these two changes, and I think the class would be significantly improved without affecting high-level play.

[MrStabby]

I updated the opening post to address some of the recent comments. People seem to be arguing with an idea that no one actually holds.

In summary: everyone agrees that high-level Monks are strong. There is absolutely no debate in this thread, or elsewhere that I've seen, about whether Monks are viable in tiers 3 and 4. We all agree that they are.

The debate is primarily over whether the subclasses are perfect (probably best left to separate threads about specific subclasses) and whether the Monk needs tweaks in tier 1 and tier 2.

It's important to remember that tiers 1 and 2 are more important than later tiers. This is because most play takes place in tiers 1 and 2. Games are disproportionately likely to start at level 1 and seldom go on long enough for players to get into the later tiers. Additionally, many DMs don't feel comfortable enough with the rules and monsters to run high-level games; low-level games are far less intimidating. Thus most people's opinions of a class are heavily, if not entirely, based upon how that class performs at low levels.

That's probably why Monks frequently get low ratings from players andd were rated the second weakest class mechanically (see the OP). I believe that sentiment came from low-level play, not high-level play.

My stance is that the Monk is fine except for Step of the Wind (should be free) and needing a bonus ASI at level 6 (for character customization so not all ASIs go to stats). Make these two changes, and I think the class would be significantly improved without affecting high-level play.

I think you are getting a bit hung up on a single survey of a small size. It isn't really enough evidence to justify changes (of course feel free to play around for your own satisfaction, you are entitled).

I also think that monks fall behind a bit at higher levels, mainly because spells become so powerful and spell slots and spells known become so abundant. When a wizard can banish half an encounter with no repeat saves as an action the efforts of the monk seem somewhat weak compared to where they were. Òf course they suffer less than other fighter type classes which can distort the view a little.

I would also ignore low levels. They pass so quickly that they don't take up so much game time. In my experience most table time is levels 6 to 10. This is where the monks shine though. Enough Ki to use frequently, strong stats dominating proficiency in influencing saves, still a high opportunity cost to taking feats for bonus action attacks, less likely to fall behind due to powerful magic weapons and armour, and monk mobility being rare rather than for anyone who picked up the right magic item.

[Trickery]

I would also ignore low levels. They pass so quickly that they don't take up so much game time. In my experience most table time is levels 6 to 10. This is where the monks shine though. Enough Ki to use frequently, strong stats dominating proficiency in influencing saves, still a high opportunity cost to taking feats for bonus action attacks, less likely to fall behind due to powerful magic weapons and armour, and monk mobility being rare rather than for anyone who picked up the right magic item.

This is a common misconception. People often assume that the first tier of play passes quickly. In fact, that's where most play happens.

Here's a post discussing data from the D&D Beyond platform: https://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?6028-90-of-D-D-Games-Stop-By-Level-10-Wizards-More-Popular-At-Higher-Levels. As you can see, tier 1 accounts for 62.8% of all play.

That's why feel at low levels is so important (and is also why I don't personally care about tier 4). For many players, that's the only experience they'll get with the class.

[stoutstien]

This is a common misconception. People often assume that the first tier of play passes quickly. In fact, that's where most play happens.

Here's a post discussing data from the D&D Beyond platform: https://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?6028-90-of-D-D-Games-Stop-By-Level-10-Wizards-More-Popular-At-Higher-Levels. As you can see, tier 1 accounts for 62.8% of all play.

That's why feel at low levels is so important (and is also why I don't personally care about tier 4). For many players, that's the only experience they'll get with the class.

All the link you have provided are considered straw polls. A very small % of players frequently visit the sites and only a small part of those take the time to be part of the poles. Another words, the sample sizes is too small to be of any use

[Trickery]

All the link you have provided are considered straw polls. A very small % of players frequently visit the sites and only a small part of those take the time to be part of the poles. Another words, the sample sizes is too small to be of any use

That last one isn't a straw poll - it's pulled directly from D&D Beyond data. Unless you know something about it that I don't.

[stoutstien]

This is a common misconception. People often assume that the first tier of play passes quickly. In fact, that's where most play happens.

Here's a post discussing data from the D&D Beyond platform: https://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?6028-90-of-D-D-Games-Stop-By-Level-10-Wizards-More-Popular-At-Higher-Levels. As you can see, tier 1 accounts for 62.8% of all play.

That's why feel at low levels is so important (and is also why I don't personally care about tier 4). For many players, that's the only experience they'll get with the class.

All the link you have provided are considered straw polls. A very small % of players frequently visit the sites and only a small part of those take the time to be part of the poles. Another words, the sample sizes is too small to be of any use

[Trickery]

All the link you have provided are considered straw polls. A very small % of players frequently visit the sites and only a small part of those take the time to be part of the poles. Another words, the sample sizes is too small to be of any use

Think you posted this twice. Please refer to my previous post. The data I linked about where most play happens did not come from a straw pool. Rather, D&D Beyond released that data mined from usage of the entire platform. Two key takeaways: most play happens in tier 1, and 90% of games stop by level 10.

I particularly liked what Jacob Lewis had to say about this:

Not surprising, but this hardly seems unique for any particular edition. It requires much more effort and commitment (and maybe some luck) to reach those tier 3/4 levels from scratch.

I've always considered how seldom I ever used high level options in actual play and how much space could be salvaged in the core books to focus more on those tiers that are most often used. I would like to see core books that only go to level 10 for the majority of players, and then supplement books (i.e. PHB 2, MM2, DMG2) expand play for more dedicated players into tiers 3-4. Call those "Advanced" or "Expert", if you like. It might curb an implied idea that level 20 is the endgame achievement for all campaigns. Just a thought, but one I've held for a long time.

We don't have to accept this data as accurate. It doesn't account for home games or play taking place in game shops outside of D&D Beyond. However, Wizards' own data is the best data we have on the matter. If we're not willing to accept their data, we may as well toss out everyone's data. And then we won't be able to agree on any facts. We'll just be throwing opinions at each other with no basis.

However, to some degree, it's irrelevant where most play takes place. Classes should feel good at every level. Every tier of play matters regardless of how much play takes place in that tier. And my contention is that the Monk has some issues at low levels that are easily addressed without breaking anything.

[Daghoulish]

However, Wizards' own data is the best data we have on the matter.

D&D Beyond is not a part of Wizards of the Coast and is only affiliated with them. Their data might not even be the same data that Wizards themselves use.

[Trickery]

D&D Beyond is not a part of Wizards of the Coast and is only affiliated with them. Their data might not even be the same data that Wizards themselves use.

That's fine, but it doesn't change my conclusion unless you have access to better data. That said, we're arguing a minor point here.

[Nagog]

I'm not seeing the lack of options at low levels? Monk level ups are crammed to the point where at early levels you essentially get two abilities a level:


Level 1: Martial Arts and Unarmored Defense
Level 2: Flurry of Blows, Patient Defense, Step of the Wind, Unarmored movement 10ft
Level 3: Subclass abiltiies and deflect missiles
Level 4: ASI AND Slow Fall
Level 5: Extra Attack AND Stunning Strike


Combine that with every level gains another ki point and I'm not seeing an issue with their features (most of which are not ki dependent)?

They gain unlimited BA attacks (compare to War Cleric where it's limited PER DAY, Berserker Barbarian where it's per rage and the privilege costs you a level of exhaustion or TWF that restricts your weapons and doesn't add your mod by standard) and lots of little benefits like not needing to care about armor and can use their body to attack with (from 5th onwards) weapon equivalent damage, meaning Monks are always ready, they can't be disarmed, they can't be made vulnerable (like most other classes) and for those reasons also excel at infilitration.

The only way I see a monk struggle is when they don't get enough short rests and that is an issue that would also affect Warlocks, Fighters and to an extent Wizards.


It's only in play that you encounter the issues. They die quite easily if the player isn't careful, they don't do as much damage as you expect, and they run out of Ki much more quickly than it seems like they should. As I said, they get much better at high levels. It's low levels where they struggle compared to other martials.

I feel the best way to resolve this is as somebody said earlier (I couldn't find the comment, but it isn't my idea), to triple the Ki points (or double them) and have them recharge on a long rest. This would allow them to Nova in a similar way to Fighters and Barbarians when the DM uses the "15 minute adventuring day" style, or play more conservatively for DMs that use short rests and more frequent encounters. As I've been reading through the thread, it seems the difference between those who feel the Monk is fine and those who insist it needs a change is in the way the DM runs their games relative to recharging on Short Rests. Similar to Warlocks quickly running out of steam if not provided short rests to get their spell slots back, Monks need those short rests as well. Warlocks, however, have cantrips and Invocations to keep them useful, while Monks are much more limited, as without their Ki abilities, their scaling usable abilities are limited to movement, Martial Arts die, and whatever their subclass gives them, if anything. Pretty much everything else is passive.

[Amechra]

I feel the best way to resolve this is as somebody said earlier (I couldn't find the comment, but it isn't my idea), to triple the Ki points (or double them) and have them recharge on a long rest. This would allow them to Nova in a similar way to Fighters and Barbarians when the DM uses the "15 minute adventuring day" style, or play more conservatively for DMs that use short rests and more frequent encounters. As I've been reading through the thread, it seems the difference between those who feel the Monk is fine and those who insist it needs a change is in the way the DM runs their games relative to recharging on Short Rests. Similar to Warlocks quickly running out of steam if not provided short rests to get their spell slots back, Monks need those short rests as well. Warlocks, however, have cantrips and Invocations to keep them useful, while Monks are much more limited, as without their Ki abilities, their scaling usable abilities are limited to movement, Martial Arts die, and whatever their subclass gives them, if anything. Pretty much everything else is passive.

Well yes, denying the short-rest classes (Monks, Warlocks, kinda Bards) a chance to recharge as often as they should nerfs them heavily. However, I don't think turning them into long-rest-based classes is a good solution, since then (barring time-constrained campaigns) the players will just go for long rests every single time. And then we're back to the whole "adventure for five minutes, nap for eight hours" thing.

Personally, I think the "you get a short rest every two encounters and a long rest every six" suggestion probably matches what the developers intended balance-wise the best. As for the long-rest people... don't burn your only Action Surge in the first round of a fight against a single zombie, and you'll be fine¹. This has the added benefit of still letting Catnap do something useful...

¹ Our Fighter did that last week. Yes, the GM rolled really poorly on the random encounter table.

[Trickery]

Well yes, denying the short-rest classes (Monks, Warlocks, kinda Bards) a chance to recharge as often as they should nerfs them heavily. However, I don't think turning them into long-rest-based classes is a good solution, since then (barring time-constrained campaigns) the players will just go for long rests every single time. And then we're back to the whole "adventure for five minutes, nap for eight hours" thing.

Personally, I think the "you get a short rest every two encounters and a long rest every six" suggestion probably matches what the developers intended balance-wise the best. As for the long-rest people... don't burn your only Action Surge in the first round of a fight against a single zombie, and you'll be fine¹. This has the added benefit of still letting Catnap do something useful...

¹ Our Fighter did that last week. Yes, the GM rolled really poorly on the random encounter table.

What I've done before is just allow the players the benefit of a long rest any time they finish an encounter. But that only works for me because I don't throw small, inconsequential encounters at players. If there's gonna be a fight, it's going to be something unique. And I also treat strings of smaller encounters (invading a base that's on high-alert, for example) as a single encounter.

DMs should do whatever works for their table. I'm not too concerned about it, though I do think it wools be good to have short rest and long rest variants of each class for players that want to use them or DMs that want to just focus on one type of rest for their campaign.

I don't see that as impacting Monks much. At the end of the day, they should have the same approximate number of uses for their abilities.

[Amechra]

What I've done before is just allow the players the benefit of a long rest any time they finish an encounter. But that only works for me because I don't throw small, inconsequential encounters at players. If there's gonna be a fight, it's going to be something unique. And I also treat strings of smaller encounters (invading a base that's on high-alert, for example) as a single encounter.

DMs should do whatever works for their table. I'm not too concerned about it, though I do think it wools be good to have short rest and long rest variants of each class for players that want to use them or DMs that want to just focus on one type of rest for their campaign.

I don't see that as impacting Monks much. At the end of the day, they should have the same approximate number of uses for their abilities.

My complaints are mostly A) I dislike nova-ing as an encouraged "thing" and B) I find small, frequently refreshing pools to feel better, gameplay-wise. Both of these are pretty subjective, though.

That being said, I'd be interested in seeing more stuff like Bardic Inspiration, where moving up the tiers moves a resource from a long rest recharge to short rest recharge. Or stuff like Arcane Recovery, where you can recover some of your long-rest resources during a short rest. Could be a neat design experiment.

[Trickery]

My complaints are mostly A) I dislike nova-ing as an encouraged "thing" and B) I find small, frequently refreshing pools to feel better, gameplay-wise. Both of these are pretty subjective, though.

That being said, I'd be interested in seeing more stuff like Bardic Inspiration, where moving up the tiers moves a resource from a long rest recharge to short rest recharge. Or stuff like Arcane Recovery, where you can recover some of your long-rest resources during a short rest. Could be a neat design experiment.

In theory you could turn all casters into short rest casters by adding their spell slot levels, dividing by three, and converting to spell points per short rest (or doing a similar thing with the DMG spell point system). But people seem hesitant about spell points.

[Nagog]

What I've done before is just allow the players the benefit of a long rest any time they finish an encounter. But that only works for me because I don't throw small, inconsequential encounters at players. If there's gonna be a fight, it's going to be something unique. And I also treat strings of smaller encounters (invading a base that's on high-alert, for example) as a single encounter.

DMs should do whatever works for their table. I'm not too concerned about it, though I do think it wools be good to have short rest and long rest variants of each class for players that want to use them or DMs that want to just focus on one type of rest for their campaign.

I don't see that as impacting Monks much. At the end of the day, they should have the same approximate number of uses for their abilities.

Good point. At this point though, short-rest classes are slighted of resources, as they are less equipped for long, drawn out encounters (as you said, strings of smaller encounters). Short rest classes typically have other abilities to fall back on (martial prowess, invocations, etc.), whereas monks, as previously stated, fall back on skills that don't scale nearly as well as other classes. Even in such a case of a single, drawn out encounter, Monks currently have the stamina to continue pumping out at the same level as their peers.


My complaints are mostly A) I dislike nova-ing as an encouraged "thing" and B) I find small, frequently refreshing pools to feel better, gameplay-wise. Both of these are pretty subjective, though.

That being said, I'd be interested in seeing more stuff like Bardic Inspiration, where moving up the tiers moves a resource from a long rest recharge to short rest recharge. Or stuff like Arcane Recovery, where you can recover some of your long-rest resources during a short rest. Could be a neat design experiment.

I agree, Nova-ing has it's place, but it's uses should be few and far-between.
I like your idea of more short rest mechanics, and I think that if every class had an important resource or ability to use on a short rest, more parties and DMs would use them. Frankly, before joining this forum a few months ago, I was unaware that Paladins regained anything on a short rest, even having played one for months. Nobody else in the party needed them, and generally we never needed the healing from them, so it never came up. Now that I know, I feel a lot more comfortable using my Channel Divinity for it's spell-like effect rather than worrying we'll need the 1d6 healing later (Oath of the Throne). If every class had a short-rest resource, it would be an ingrained game mechanic rather than an afterthought.

[samcifer]

I created my own homebrewed monastic tradition on here that focuses on Wisdom for extra benefits including damage increase and the rogue's ability to reduce damage.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?593657-Theory-crafting-a-wisdom-focused-Monastic-Tradition

Please let me know what you think of it and any ideas on making it better.

[Amechra]

An idle set of thoughts / theorizing:

Assuming a slightly simplified model of the game (a short rest every two encounters, a long rest at the end of the sixth encounter), you could essentially classify classes into four different types:

Constant: They get x1 "coolness" every encounter. They don't care about short rests or long rests other than for regaining health. Rogues are probably the closest thing in canon 5e, though they're kind of a weird case.
Steady: They get x2 "coolness" every short or long rest, and can "spend" it on encounters in x1 increments. They love short rests to pieces. Monks and Warlocks fit here.
Nova: They get x1 "coolness" every short rest, and x4 "coolness" from a long rest. Short rests are useful but not amazing. Most of the remaining classes fit in here.
Supernova: They get x6 "coolness" every long rest, and nothing but healing from short rests. I think Sorcerers are the only class in this particular paradigm, since they have no short rest features unless a subclass hands them out.

Everyone works out to x6 "coolness" over every long rest, which if we take that as our balance point means that they're balanced against each-other. Plus, everyone can contribute x1 "coolness" to every fight if they want to. Yay! But what if we change up the schedule for our rests?

• Changing it to one encounter per rest instead of two boosts everyone other than Constant characters up to being able to contribute x2 "coolness". Constant classes are eclipsed as a result.
• Changing it so that you get a long rest every four encounters instead of every six hurts everyone below Nova/Supernova.
• Making all rests long rests makes Supernova so much better than everyone else that it gets kinda funny.

---

I think it'd be interesting to see a redesign of the classes with that kind of idea in mind. Subclasses could let you switch a class between two types ("Open-Hand Monk is a Steady class, Four Elements Monk is a Nova class"), with explicit pointers towards what kinds of classes you should have for different rest structures.

It'd actually help out with whole "modular complexity" thing, too - Constant/Steady classes are much simpler to manage the resources for, since burning yourself out in an encounter gives you at most 1 encounter before you get them back. Compare it to a Supernova class, where you could burn yourself out completely within 1-2 encounters and be left auto-attacking/cantrip-casting for the rest of the "day".

EDIT: More on topic: an issue I see with letting Monks have all of their ki points at a long rest is because it would very much unbalance Stunning Strike. They can spend 1 ki to Flurry of Blows, then burn a ki on Stunning Strike for all four of those attacks if necessary. As it stands, you can't pull off the "full" version of that three times in an encounter until 15th level - a long-rest Monk could do that at 5th level. That's enough to almost completely shut an enemy out of a fight, and does it in a way that blazes through Legendary Saves like they were tissue paper. As it stands, Stunning Strike is good enough that the rest of the class "needs" to be nerfed.

[samcifer]

An idle set of thoughts / theorizing:

Assuming a slightly simplified model of the game (a short rest every two encounters, a long rest at the end of the sixth encounter), you could essentially classify classes into four different types:

Constant: They get x1 "coolness" every encounter. They don't care about short rests or long rests other than for regaining health. Rogues are probably the closest thing in canon 5e, though they're kind of a weird case.
Steady: They get x2 "coolness" every short or long rest, and can "spend" it on encounters in x1 increments. They love short rests to pieces. Monks and Warlocks fit here.
Nova: They get x1 "coolness" every short rest, and x4 "coolness" from a long rest. Short rests are useful but not amazing. Most of the remaining classes fit in here.
Supernova: They get x6 "coolness" every long rest, and nothing but healing from short rests. I think Sorcerers are the only class in this particular paradigm, since they have no short rest features unless a subclass hands them out.

Everyone works out to x6 "coolness" over every long rest, which if we take that as our balance point means that they're balanced against each-other. Plus, everyone can contribute x1 "coolness" to every fight if they want to. Yay! But what if we change up the schedule for our rests?

• Changing it to one encounter per rest instead of two boosts everyone other than Constant characters up to being able to contribute x2 "coolness". Constant classes are eclipsed as a result.
• Changing it so that you get a long rest every four encounters instead of every six hurts everyone below Nova/Supernova.
• Making all rests long rests makes Supernova so much better than everyone else that it gets kinda funny.

---

I think it'd be interesting to see a redesign of the classes with that kind of idea in mind. Subclasses could let you switch a class between two types ("Open-Hand Monk is a Steady class, Four Elements Monk is a Nova class"), with explicit pointers towards what kinds of classes you should have for different rest structures.

It'd actually help out with whole "modular complexity" thing, too - Constant/Steady classes are much simpler to manage the resources for, since burning yourself out in an encounter gives you at most 1 encounter before you get them back. Compare it to a Supernova class, where you could burn yourself out completely within 1-2 encounters and be left auto-attacking/cantrip-casting for the rest of the "day".

In my play-group, the highest level we ever got to was 13, so without some way to up damage, monks are just too weak to play as-is for my taste.

[Nagog]

More on topic: an issue I see with letting Monks have all of their ki points at a long rest is because it would very much unbalance Stunning Strike. They can spend 1 ki to Flurry of Blows, then burn a ki on Stunning Strike for all four of those attacks if necessary. As it stands, you can't pull off the "full" version of that three times in an encounter until 15th level - a long-rest Monk could do that at 5th level. That's enough to almost completely shut an enemy out of a fight, and does it in a way that blazes through Legendary Saves like they were tissue paper. As it stands, Stunning Strike is good enough that the rest of the class "needs" to be nerfed.

Valid point. Perhaps give it a secondary thing, like a recharge of 1d4 rounds? Or increase the cost of stunning strike to 2 or 3 Ki points, to keep it on par with it's power level. As is, without a proper recharge, monks can Nova all their Ki for a round or two (and deal OK damage if they hit with all their attacks), or use them over the coarse of a battle to play a decent role a time or two.

I mean if we compare them to Sorcery Points, Ki points are used is (usually) less pivotal ways, and beyond a short rest there isn't a way to get them back (like Font of Magic for sorcerers).

[Trickery]

Stunning strike doesn't need an increased ki cost unless you want to increase the Monk's damage to match other martials at all levels. At that point, the class will lose its identity.

The Monk does things differently from other martials, and that's good. My issue is that this doesn't come across well at low levels due to MADness and ki shortages. Ki shortages can be fixed by simply removing the cost for Step of the Wind, and MADness can be fixed with a bonus ASI at 6. I really do think this is the ideal solution.

[KorvinStarmast]

Ki shortages can be fixed by simply removing the cost for Step of the Wind, and MADness can be fixed with a bonus ASI at 6. I really do think this is the ideal solution. Ideal or not, I think it's a decent mod that I'll discuss with my players next week. We have a monk, all the players are pretty experienced and I'll see what their gut feel is. The only concern I suspect they'll raise is that perhaps the jump bonus from SoTW is too much like magic so it needs to retain the ki cost ....I'll see what they say.

[Amechra]

Stunning strike doesn't need an increased ki cost unless you want to increase the Monk's damage to match other martials at all levels. At that point, the class will lose its identity.

The Monk does things differently from other martials, and that's good. My issue is that this doesn't come across well at low levels due to MADness and ki shortages. Ki shortages can be fixed by simply removing the cost for Step of the Wind, and MADness can be fixed with a bonus ASI at 6. I really do think this is the ideal solution.

I don't see where I'm suggesting that the cost be increased?

[Nagog]

I don't see where I'm suggesting that the cost be increased?

That was one of my suggested fixes, among others. Sorry for the confusion! :)

[Trickery]

Ideal or not, I think it's a decent mod that I'll discuss with my players next week. We have a monk, all the players are pretty experienced and I'll see what their gut feel is. The only concern I suspect they'll raise is that perhaps the jump bonus from SoTW is too much like magic so it needs to retain the ki cost ....I'll see what they say.

That's a good point. Since it only doubles jump distance, rather than tripling like the level 1 spell Jump, I figured it would be okay. However, I could see there being a Ki cost for that portion.

[Amechra]

Wait, how much does jumping come up in people's games for that to be an issue? Plus, it's mostly in there (as far as I can tell) because jump distance is Strength based, and Monks have incentives to dump Strength and have thematic reasons to be good jumpers.

[samcifer]

So I think I found a monk build that I like. It would be a lv. 10 character who is monk 5 (probably kensei), Rogue 4 (preferably swashbuckler) and Hexblade 1. I did a few test rolls and the lowest damage I got was 13 due to 3 misses and the most was due to a crit on a blow with sneak attack which with all 4 attacks with Hexblade's curse in effect and rolling d6s got me 71 damage during a single turn. Tue AC I was rolling against was AC18 to hit. If I were to play monk, it'd be that build. :)

[Misterwhisper]

So I think I found a monk build that I like. It would be a lv. 10 character who is monk 5 (probably kensei), Rogue 4 (preferably swashbuckler) and Hexblade 1. I did a few test rolls and the lowest damage I got was 13 due to 3 misses and the most was due to a crit on a blow with sneak attack which with all 4 attacks with Hexblade's curse in effect and rolling d6s got me 71 damage during a single turn. Tue AC I was rolling against was AC18 to hit. If I were to play monk, it'd be that build. :)

That is a horrible build.

There is no reason at all to put hexblade in there.

No point for the armor
Can’t use the shield
Kensei, which also sucks, can take whatever weapon it wants so the extra proficiencies from hexblade are useless.
You would need 13 in cha just to multiclass it
Hexblade cha to hit and damage is pointless because you will never have a high enough charisma
Just because a monk can use dex to hit and damage does not mean they become finesse for rogues so you still have to be picky on weapons.
You can’t sneak attack unarmed at all.
You would only have a total of 5 ki points which is not a lot at level 10
Your charisma is going to be pretty bad so most warlock spells including eldritch blast is going to miss a lot.
With all the stats you will need to multiclass your con is not going to be good.

[samcifer]

That is a horrible build.

There is no reason at all to put hexblade in there.

No point for the armor
Can’t use the shield
Kensei, which also sucks, can take whatever weapon it wants so the extra proficiencies from hexblade are useless.
You would need 13 in cha just to multiclass it
Hexblade cha to hit and damage is pointless because you will never have a high enough charisma
Just because a monk can use dex to hit and damage does not mean they become finesse for rogues so you still have to be picky on weapons.
You can’t sneak attack unarmed at all.
You would only have a total of 5 ki points which is not a lot at level 10
Your charisma is going to be pretty bad so most warlock spells including eldritch blast is going to miss a lot.
With all the stats you will need to multiclass your con is not going to be good.

Well it does really good damage so long as you use your first bonus action to add on the extra damage. In my groups, we use one of 2 blocks of starting stats: 18, 16, 14, 12, 10, & 10, or 18, 16, 16, 15, 14, & 12. I can easily do all 3 classes to up the damage and the HB dip is only a single level that nets me a use of Shield for extra defense. As for rogue levels, it's for Swashbuckler to let me move away safely and the SA damage with a few out-of-combat abilities. Ki pts would be for making extra attacks only as CON is the worst save to go against. This is a pure melee damage build more than anything at at lv. 11, I'd go for either monk 6 for attacks to overcome resistances or rogue 5 for UD. Charisma-based attacking would never be used as I'd stick to DEX for all attacking and WIS would be maxed out as well if I were to to Tabaxi for the race that, along with the 12, would give me just enough CHA to get the level of HB.

It's not a nice shiny build everyone would love, but that would be the one of 2 ways I'd play a monk, the other being to go 5 each on dragon origin Sorc and Monk for Shadow Blade and built-in armor, but that build would be more vulnerable due to needing to maintain concentration for the blade, whereas Swashbuckler has an easier time getting in the extra damage I'm looking for.

Not everyone builds and plays the same way and different does not necessarily mean bad. I wish more people online had manners like that. :/

[Misterwhisper]

Well it does really good damage so long as you use your first bonus action to add on the extra damage. In my groups, we use one of 2 blocks of starting stats: 18, 16, 14, 12, 10, & 10, or 18, 16, 16, 15, 14, & 12. I can easily do all 3 classes to up the damage and the HB dip is only a single level that nets me a use of Shield for extra defense. As for rogue levels, it's for Swashbuckler to let me move away safely and the SA damage with a few out-of-combat abilities. Ki pts would be for making extra attacks only as CON is the worst save to go against. This is a pure melee damage build more than anything at at lv. 11, I'd go for either monk 6 for attacks to overcome resistances or rogue 5 for UD. Charisma-based attacking would never be used as I'd stick to DEX for all attacking and WIS would be maxed out as well if I were to to Tabaxi for the race that, along with the 12, would give me just enough CHA to get the level of HB.

It's not a nice shiny build everyone would love, but that would be the one of 2 ways I'd play a monk, the other being to go 5 each on dragon origin Sorc and Monk for Shadow Blade and built-in armor, but that build would be more vulnerable due to needing to maintain concentration for the blade, whereas Swashbuckler has an easier time getting in the extra damage I'm looking for.

Not everyone builds and plays the same way and different does not necessarily mean bad. I wish more people online had manners like that. :/

1. You can’t use the shield and still use most of your monk abilities.

2. I assume you must be using a bow for your weapon if you are going to be using a bonus action to add damage.
That means you are not using it to use cunning action or flurry so your damage just dropped by about 40%

However you keep saying it is a pure melee build which makes no sense because if you are using your bonus action to “add on extra damage” but not using the kensei archer ability what are you doing? Swashbuckler can already sneak attack in melee without using a bonus action assuming you are using one of the 3 finesse weapons that were not just monk weapons to begin with.

3. Monks can already disengage for 1 ki and a bonus action.

4. Your groups starting point buy equivalent is more than double the starting points of the normal rules.

5. Just because you want to play it does not mean that the build is not horrible, i wish more people online could build characters that actually have synergy.

With those ungodly broken starting stats a playing level 10 monk would be a total monster.

For your build focusing on melee damage you actually made them much worse.

[RulesJD]

1. You can’t use the shield and still use most of your monk abilities.

*snip*.

Capital Shield. Pretty sure he meant the Shield spell, which really doesn't stop much on a Monk besides like Deflect Missile.

[samcifer]

1. You can’t use the shield and still use most of your monk abilities.

2. I assume you must be using a bow for your weapon if you are going to be using a bonus action to add damage.
That means you are not using it to use cunning action or flurry so your damage just dropped by about 40%

However you keep saying it is a pure melee build which makes no sense because if you are using your bonus action to “add on extra damage” but not using the kensei archer ability what are you doing? Swashbuckler can already sneak attack in melee without using a bonus action assuming you are using one of the 3 finesse weapons that were not just monk weapons to begin with.

3. Monks can already disengage for 1 ki and a bonus action.

4. Your groups starting point buy equivalent is more than double the starting points of the normal rules.

5. Just because you want to play it does not mean that the build is not horrible, i wish more people online could build characters that actually have synergy.

With those ungodly broken starting stats a playing level 10 monk would be a total monster.

For your build focusing on melee damage you actually made them much worse.

Hb is only to add the prof bonus (+4@ lv 10) to every attack. USs are made using the martial arts die (d6 @ lv 5 monk) and I'm using a short sword for regular attacks. Each attack would be doing 1d6+DEX (+5) + Prof bonus dmg (+4 @ lv 10) on 4 attacks per turn from round 2 onwards with a potential extra +2d6 extra S.A. damage on one of the first 2 attacks for the normal attack action. Don't see where the confusion is on this.

As for armor and shield, I wouldn't use them. Ki would only be used for a 4th attack (2nd US) per turn until lv 11 or higher. Swashbuckler for easier S.A. dmg chance, and drunken master if not kensei to make moving away from foes easier to avoid getting swarmed as that regularly happens with my groups.

Stats would be, after 2 asis, dex and WoD at 20, 14 con, 13 cha, 10 each for str and int.

[Misterwhisper]

Hb is only to add the prof bonus (+4@ lv 10) to every attack. UAs are made using the martial arts die (d6 @ lv 5 monk) and I'm using a short sword for regular attacks. Each attack would be doing 1d6+DEX (+5) + Prof bonus dmg (+4 @ lv 10) on 4 attacks per turn from round 2 onwards with a potential extra +2d6 extra S.A. damage on one of the first 2 attacks for the normal attack action. Don't see where the confusion is on this.

As for armor and shield, I wouldn't use them. No would only be used for a 4th attack (2nd UA) per turn until lv 11 or higher. Swashbuckler for easier S.A. dmg chance, and drunken master if not kensei to make moving away from foes easier to avoid getting swarmed as that regularly happens with my groups.

Stats would be, after 2 asis, dex and WoD at 20, 14 con, 13 cha, 10 each for str and int.

So you are taking hexblade but not using the armor, not using a shield, won’t have the charisma for casting many spells, won’t be using the charisma to hit or damage, not using any non monk weapons and only taking it for a 1 target once per rest hexblade curse?

You could have just flurried and punched them 2 more times and gotten better damage, not wasted a level on one piddly ability and taken more monk.

Everything you are trying to do could just be done better with levels of open hand monk.

[samcifer]

So you are taking hexblade but not using the armor, not using a shield, won’t have the charisma for casting many spells, won’t be using the charisma to hit or damage, not using any non monk weapons and only taking it for a 1 target once per rest hexblade curse?

You could have just flurried and punched them 2 more times and gotten better damage, not wasted a level on one piddly ability and taken more monk.

Everything you are trying to do could just be done better with levels of open hand monk.

+4 dmg up to 4 times per turn is way more reliable, tho, than trying to stun against con

[Misterwhisper]

+4 dmg up to 4 times per turn is way more reliable, tho, than trying to stun against con

I never once mentioned stunning fist in any post i have made.

Just use flurry of blows and attack them. It is that simple.

[samcifer]

I never once mentioned stunning fist in any post i have made.

Just use flurry of blows and attack them. It is that simple.

So yeah, 1d6 + 5 (DEX) + 4 (HC) up to 4 times in a turn (when using FoB) makes for some pretty respectable damage... an average of 12 dmg per hit and that's before the SA damage, so you'd be doing 50+ damage per turn, which a regular monk would not be able to match very well.

[Snails]

Your "fix" makes Monks entirely Dex-SAD, which loses a lot of the flavor of the Monk class.

Moreover, it makes them too powerful-Monks are (along with Paladins) one of the MADder classes in 5E. That's intentional-they've got enough abilities that are good enough that, if they were as SAD as a Rogue or a Wizard, they'd be TOO good.

A bit of a tangent: If true, that is a serious design flaw in those classes, which pretty much guarantees some groups will be dissatisfied due to minor play style issues.

[Misterwhisper]

So yeah, 1d6 + 5 (DEX) + 4 (HC) up to 4 times in a turn (when using FoB) makes for some pretty respectable damage... an average of 12 dmg per hit and that's before the SA damage, so you'd be doing 50+ damage per turn, which a regular monk would not be able to match very well.

That is after you spent your bonus action on turn one using the curse instead of flurry.

Also curse is one target per short rest, one enemy that is all.

Average 3 round fight:

HB:

Round 1: HBC and 2 attacks

Average damage of 25
If able to sneak attack 31.

Round 2 and 3 flurry for 4 attacks each for 50 damage plus maybe 12 from sneak attack.

This is assuming you can go all out on offense and just stand there.

Total damage is 125 to 143 depending on sneak attack or not.

Now you have spent your only HBC and 2 of your 5 ki.

That means you can not add that 4 damage per hit again until a short rest and you can only flurry 3 more times.

Not only that but in the same fight that bonus damage is only against that one target.

If you kill them you get back a hit point or 2.
Normal monk:

All rounds just flurry: 2 spear or quarterstaff attacks, 2 unarmed each round.

1d8 + 5 x 6 for 57 damage
1d6 + 5 x 6 for 51 damage

That is 108 damage.

Against anyone you want, spread out to as many targets as you can get to.

Used 3 of your 10 ki and nothing else.
Meaning you can flurry 7 more times.
If open hand each of those flurry attacks could knock the enemy prone or just stop their reactions as an added bonus.

You would also have a self heal of 30 hp.

[Trickery]

A bit of a tangent: If true, that is a serious design flaw in those classes, which pretty much guarantees some groups will be dissatisfied due to minor play style issues.

I've personally never understood why some classes are MAD and others SAD. There doesn't seem to be a consistent reason for it.

Gish builds come to mind. In that case, I get it. A character able to cast spells effectively and fight in melee effectively can do two quite different things, hence the separation of stats. In that case, it actually feels good as a player to be able to focus on one or the other with your decisions, attributes included.

But then the Hexblade came along seemingly stating that such a division is not necessary. Or, perhaps it's not necessary, but only for the warlock. That class is not quite a full caster, but is able to handle caster functions sometimes and is also able to handle damage competently. Perhaps Hexblade was only added so that the Warlock, and the Warlock alone, could be both a spellcaster and a front-liner competently without sacrificing its attributes. It's hard to say. I'd have to sit down with the designers and discuss it.

In fact, if anyone has a video of the designers discussing the Hexblade and why it alone among Gish options is SAD, I'd like to see it.

Back on-topic, I don't think the Monk fits the bill of "class that handles both spellcasting and front-line combat." It's an unusual class, for sure. But it's also limited almost exclusively to melee attacks in order to maintain maximum effectiveness (stunning strike doesn't work on ranged attacks, not even ray attacks from the Sun Soul). So I don't think it makes sense for Monks to be MAD.

That said, it's easier to fix that MADness with a bonus ASI than with the rework I originally proposed.

[samcifer]

That is after you spent your bonus action on turn one using the curse instead of flurry.

Also curse is one target per short rest, one enemy that is all.

Average 3 round fight:

HB:

Round 1: HBC and 2 attacks

Average damage of 25
If able to sneak attack 31.

Round 2 and 3 flurry for 4 attacks each for 50 damage plus maybe 12 from sneak attack.

This is assuming you can go all out on offense and just stand there.

Total damage is 125 to 143 depending on sneak attack or not.

Now you have spent your only HBC and 2 of your 5 ki.

That means you can not add that 4 damage per hit again until a short rest and you can only flurry 3 more times.

Not only that but in the same fight that bonus damage is only against that one target.

If you kill them you get back a hit point or 2.
Normal monk:

All rounds just flurry: 2 spear or quarterstaff attacks, 2 unarmed each round.

1d8 + 5 x 6 for 57 damage
1d6 + 5 x 6 for 51 damage

That is 108 damage.

Against anyone you want, spread out to as many targets as you can get to.

Used 3 of your 10 ki and nothing else.
Meaning you can flurry 7 more times.
If open hand each of those flurry attacks could knock the enemy prone or just stop their reactions as an added bonus.

You would also have a self heal of 30 hp.

But you're applying d8 damage when you need a hand free to attack with for FoB, so that would instead be a d6 of damage with a spear/quarterstaff.

[Misterwhisper]

But you're applying d8 damage when you need a hand free to attack with for FoB, so that would instead be a d6 of damage with a spear/quarterstaff.

{Scrubbed}

[Trickery]

{Scrubbed post, scrubbed quote}

{Scrubbed}

What Misterwhisper is saying is that you don't need a hand free to use an unarmed strike. Any body part is fine. It's in Melee Atacks.


Instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon Attack, you can use an Unarmed Strike: a punch, kick, head--butt, or similar forceful blow (none of which count as weapons). On a hit, an Unarmed Strike deals bludgeoning damage equal to 1 + your Strength modifier. You are proficient with your unarmed strikes.

That's why many Monks prefer the quarterstaff. It's cheap and gives them a D8 for one or two attacks per round.

[RulesJD]

{Scrubbed}

What Misterwhisper is saying is that you don't need a hand free to use an unarmed strike. Any body part is fine. It's in Melee Atacks.



That's why many Monks prefer the quarterstaff. It's cheap and gives them a D8 for one or two attacks per round.

Spear is actually best, since it gives you a bit of a ranged option. Although there are way more magical Quarterstaffs for hitting things so eventually back at the QS.

[Zetakya]

{Scrubbed}

What Misterwhisper is saying is that you don't need a hand free to use an unarmed strike. Any body part is fine. It's in Melee Atacks.



That's why many Monks prefer the quarterstaff. It's cheap and gives them a D8 for one or two attacks per round.

This is why Kensai starts off with looking for increased damage dice.

It ends up with looking for damage type variances, ofc.

[Misterwhisper]

This is why Kensai starts off with looking for increased damage dice.

It ends up with looking for damage type variances, ofc.

Kensei could get a d10 which is only one step better than a spear anyway.

I just wish there was some way to make a rapier a monk weapon without having to take Kensei because overall the subclass is pretty weak.

[samcifer]

{Scrubbed}

What Misterwhisper is saying is that you don't need a hand free to use an unarmed strike. Any body part is fine. It's in Melee Atacks.



That's why many Monks prefer the quarterstaff. It's cheap and gives them a D8 for one or two attacks per round.

Then I admit to having mis-understood that part of the rules. (It's been well over a year since I read that part and as unarmed attacks don't come up much for me, I assumed you could only use your hands to attack someone unless you were in a form that had a tail you could attack with as an action).

So you can have both hands occupied with a weapon and still be able to what, kick or headbutt someone and use the martial arts die for the damage of such an attack? Oop, nevermind, I see that someone answered as such above.

I'm basing all of this off of the experiences I've been having with my group where most battles are over with in 3 turns. There was a monk in our group, the arrakocra (sp?) race and open-hand and he stayed pure monk from where we started off at lv 8 and ended at lv. 13 and he seemed to be doing the worst as far as damage goes for the entire group. Yes, he survived, but he never shined and his stunning blows rarely took, making for wasted ki that would have been spent in more useful ways, say for more FoBs that would've done more damage.

Everyone seems to hate how weak monks are at mid-levels, which is the range at which most of my groups games tend to be for most of each campaign, hence me wanting to find a way to get more damage per attack. I'd probably be looking at a total of 12 attacks per battle, so giving up 2 of those attacks to add +4 dmg to the other 10 attacks for an extra 40 damage or so (assuming every blow lands of course) makes sense to me. If I were able to get the drop on a target and HC them before a battle begins, that's another extra 24 )or so) possible damage I could add on and 2 more chances to crit.

My issue is people acting like doing that is such a terrible choice when it makes more sense to me mathematically to do it.

[Trickery]

Then I admit to having mis-understood that part of the rules. (It's been well over a year since I read that part and as unarmed attacks don't come up much for me, I assumed you could only use your hands to attack someone unless you were in a form that had a tail you could attack with as an action).

So you can have both hands occupied with a weapon and still be able to what, kick or headbutt someone and use the martial arts die for the damage of such an attack?

It's okay. You wouldn't believe some of the crap I forget, especially at the table.

And yes, you can still use unarmed strikes at no penalty while your hands full. At the extreme, silly end of the spectrum, a character could be carrying a piano over their head (while the Bard plays it) and still kicking targets who get too close.


https://i.redd.it/ez41kdzuub931.png

An aside: this technically means that characters wielding reach weapons have two ranges for the purpose of opportunity attacks. They can attack a target with an unarmed strike for leaving their 5' reach, or they can attack a target with their reach weapon for leaving their 10' reach. It has some important implications for anyone wishing to use the famous (or infamous?) Sentinel + Polearm Master combo.

[samcifer]

Well, for fun I just used a character-creator to make up a what-if character of an aarakcroiya (still can't get the spelling of that race) light monk 5/champion fighter 4/hexblade warlock 1 at lv. 10.

With the starting stats of 18, 16, 14, 12, 10, and 10, I got an AC of 20, 77hp, maxed out DEX and WIS as well as 13 CHA and 14 CON with STR and INT being the dump stats at 10 each.

The idea is to use HC on turn 1, then attack 2 times, then action surge. In our group, we've ruled that AS grants an additional bonus action, so I can attack 6 times during a turn for an average of 72 damage and an average of 48 damage on consecutive turns, all radiant damage with a range of 30 ft. True that I won't be ever using stunning strike, but I hate the low odds (at least in my group and with my luck on getting foes to save against my effects) of SS. I'd also have flying from lv. 1 (technically), adding much to my mobility.

An ugly build, most assuredly. One I would enjoy playing? Most definitely (and in the end, isn't enjoying playing a character the best part of playing them?)

[Zetakya]

Kensei could get a d10 which is only one step better than a spear anyway.

I just wish there was some way to make a rapier a monk weapon without having to take Kensei because overall the subclass is pretty weak.

It's not weak, but unlike most Monks it is gear-dependent.

If you have access to weaponry that allows you to select damage types and have elemental bonus effects, it's got a lot of versatility.

[Misterwhisper]

It's not weak, but unlike most Monks it is gear-dependent.

If you have access to weaponry that allows you to select damage types and have elemental bonus effects, it's got a lot of versatility.

You could just do that with any monk.

Magic spears, staves, daggers, shortswords, whatever.

All monks can use a d8 weapon at level 1.

At level 3 a Kensei can pick longbow essentially and one other non heavy, non special weapon to go with them.

If you pick longsword as a monk weapon it opens up a few extra options of magic gear you might could use.

Not really worth a subclass.

Also the idea that they get like 5 choices is also a horrible balance issue, instead of better subclass abilities they just stuck on more choices you will probably never use.

Also those choices of extra magic weapons just increases the likely good that your main subclass ability can’t be used. Their ability to add + 1, 2, or 3 does not work on weapons that already have a bonus to hit and damage. You can’t even override it with a better bonus.

Ex you pick longsword as a Kensei weapon because they are pretty common.

You find a +1 longsword, cool, but you can’t use your level 11 ability of sharpen the blade on it to make it a + 3.

Your level 6 ability of making the weapons magic is redundant because it already is.

You could gain +2 ac as well but only if you only attack with your new kensei weapon once a turn and just use unarmed attacks for the other 1, 2, or 3 attacks you get.

You can shoot a longbow and spend a bonus action to add 1d4 damage.
However you can’t use stunning strike with it, which is by far the best monk ability, and if you bonus action Kensei shot you can’t flurry, step of the wind, agile parry or patient defense.
Monks also still don’t get a fighting style or have the spare asi to support archery.

[Amechra]

You know what Magic Kensei Weapons and Sharpen The Blade are really good for? Buffing the non-magical longbow that you carry around as a back-up for those rare times when you can't reach someone. Oh look, you have a +3 longbow for this fight that cost your party nothing and doesn't take up one of your attunement slots. How handy.

Or if you have a magic weapon that doesn't give you a +X to attack and damage. If I were offered a Sword of Wounding as a Kensei, I'd be on that in a heartbeat.

[Trickery]

You know what Magic Kensei Weapons and Sharpen The Blade are really good for? Buffing the non-magical longbow that you carry around as a back-up for those rare times when you can't reach someone. Oh look, you have a +3 longbow for this fight that cost your party nothing and doesn't take up one of your attunement slots. How handy.

Or if you have a magic weapon that doesn't give you a +X to attack and damage. If I were offered a Sword of Wounding as a Kensei, I'd be on that in a heartbeat.

The trouble I have with Kensei is that it's a Monk that focuses on damage, but Monks don't have great damage to begin with at most levels. You can make a Sharpshooter Kensei with two levels of Ranger for Hunter's Mark and Archery, then try to find a magical longbow that deals extra damage but doesn't have a +X mod on it so you can still use sharpen the blade...but you're still not really competitive for damage. You'd be better off just making a Ranger or Fighter if you wanted a high-damage archer, or a Fighter or Barbarian for a high-damage melee character who's hard to kill. Monks do other things. That's why I'm not a huge fan of the Kensei - it doesn't really expand what the Monk can do.

[Misterwhisper]

You know what Magic Kensei Weapons and Sharpen The Blade are really good for? Buffing the non-magical longbow that you carry around as a back-up for those rare times when you can't reach someone. Oh look, you have a +3 longbow for this fight that cost your party nothing and doesn't take up one of your attunement slots. How handy.

Or if you have a magic weapon that doesn't give you a +X to attack and damage. If I were offered a Sword of Wounding as a Kensei, I'd be on that in a heartbeat.

So you are going to spend 3 ki, in a backup weapon that you have no fighting style or feats for because it is just a backup weapon.

Meanwhile every monk can just carry a short bow and shoot twice and the very common wood elf monk can use the longbow anyway.

Do you know how many magic weapons there are that don’t have + 1 or better on it?

About 5.

Flametongue and oathbow are nice the rest are meh.

If your subclass needs you to find very specific magical gear to work well, it is not a good subclass.

[JNAProductions]

So you are going to spend 3 ki, in a backup weapon that you have no fighting style or feats for because it is just a backup weapon.

Meanwhile every monk can just carry a short bow and shoot twice and the very common wood elf monk can use the longbow anyway.

Do you know how many magic weapons there are that don’t have + 1 or better on it?

About 5.

Flametongue and oathbow are nice the rest are meh.

If your subclass needs you to find very specific magical gear to work well, it is not a good subclass.

I don't quite get what you're saying. Nothing stops the Kensei from shooting twice like a regular Monk, they still get extra attack. They're just shooting with 3 points more on their to-hit and damage rolls.

[Misterwhisper]

I don't quite get what you're saying. Nothing stops the Kensei from shooting twice like a regular Monk, they still get extra attack. They're just shooting with 3 points more on their to-hit and damage rolls.

That is kind of the point any monk can just carry a +1 short or longbow and do fine. On top of being the most mobile class in the game the times that you will not be able to get into melee will be very slim.

[JNAProductions]

That is kind of the point any monk can just carry a +1 short or longbow and do fine. On top of being the most mobile class in the game the times that you will not be able to get into melee will be very slim.

Because +1=/=+3.

It's a decent boost, and doesn't rely on your DM handing out magic items.

[Snails]

I've personally never understood why some classes are MAD and others SAD. There doesn't seem to be a consistent reason for it.

Gish builds come to mind. In that case, I get it. A character able to cast spells effectively and fight in melee effectively can do two quite different things, hence the separation of stats. In that case, it actually feels good as a player to be able to focus on one or the other with your decisions, attributes included.

IMHO...

The Designers of pretty much every edition have viewed the Paladin and Monk as "Gish-ish".* Hence it is "necessary" to hobble the class so their awesome abilities do not run roughshod over the whole game.

Obviously, such reasoning has never been carefully thought through, especially in light of how multi classing rules work, e.g. compare Paladin to a similarly built Fighter/Cleric in 1e/2e/3e.

In 5e the Paladin is sufficiently robust that its MADness is not so annoying.

Alas the 5e Monk has not escaped the trap. It is not that the new edition Monk is unplayable, but that there are very few practical choices on how to play it so that it does not suck. That is the classic whiff of a weak class, that every non-optimal choice is a bad choice.


* "Gish" and "Gish-ish" are convenient labels. The issues long predate common usage of the term Gish.

[Amechra]

Can I play at your table, Misterwhisper? I'd love to get magic items for my back-up fighting style without having to fight over them with the other players.

[Misterwhisper]

Can I play at your table, Misterwhisper? I'd love to get magic items for my back-up fighting style without having to fight over them with the other players.

We were talking about the ability they get at level 11, if you do not have a +1 back up weapon by level 11, your dm is cheating you.

Especially for someone so common as a long or short bow.

If for some reason your back up weapon is a pike or something, yeah you are kind of out of luck.

In every game I have ever played in, nobody bothered to carry a backup weapon, unless they had a magic foci and a magic weapon.

In 5e disarming is pretty much a joke so it is not like in 3.5 where it could get you killed.
Resistance to specific damage type is uncommon enough to not matter, but common pluses are always fine. If one enemy is resistant to slashing and you use a longsword just attack someone else. How often is everyone in a fight resistant to the same of S/B/P but not the others by then?

[stoutstien]

We were talking about the ability they get at level 11, if you do not have a +1 back up weapon by level 11, your dm is cheating you.

Especially for someone so common as a long or short bow.

If for some reason your back up weapon is a pike or something, yeah you are kind of out of luck.

In every game I have ever played in, nobody bothered to carry a backup weapon, unless they had a magic foci and a magic weapon.

In 5e disarming is pretty much a joke so it is not like in 3.5 where it could get you killed.
Resistance to specific damage type is uncommon enough to not matter, but common pluses are always fine. If one enemy is resistant to slashing and you use a longsword just attack someone else. How often is everyone in a fight resistant to the same of S/B/P but not the others by then?

I don't hand out + weapons or items that increase stats like gauntlets of ogre strength. They are boring and unlike past editions 5e makes no assumption that a player need + attack weapons to hit higher and higher thresholds.

[Amechra]

In 5e disarming is pretty much a joke so it is not like in 3.5 where it could get you killed.

In 5e, Monk disarms you. Seriously, the DMG disarm rules heavily favor someone who gets 4 attacks per round at 5th level. As for the "they can just pick the weapon up¹"... pick it up first, then chuck it. Laugh merrily.

Also... why have a +1 weapon you're going to use maybe one fight out of three if you can have a +3 weapon that doesn't cost you an attunement slot that you're going to use roughly the same amount of time? Sure, it costs you 3 ki for the fight... but at that level 3 ki is nothing unless you're spamming that button like it's going out of style. And if you're in "I have to use a bow!" territory, you can't use your biggest ki sink (Stunning Strike) anyway.

¹ On a side note, I kinda hate that you can pick up weapons as a free action, but can't stand up without sacrificing half of your movement. It should definitely be a bit trickier than drawing a sword.

[Misterwhisper]

In 5e, Monk disarms you. Seriously, the DMG disarm rules heavily favor someone who gets 4 attacks per round at 5th level. As for the "they can just pick the weapon up¹"... pick it up first, then chuck it. Laugh merrily.

Also... why have a +1 weapon you're going to use maybe one fight out of three if you can have a +3 weapon that doesn't cost you an attunement slot that you're going to use roughly the same amount of time? Sure, it costs you 3 ki for the fight... but at that level 3 ki is nothing unless you're spamming that button like it's going out of style. And if you're in "I have to use a bow!" territory, you can't use your biggest ki sink (Stunning Strike) anyway.

¹ On a side note, I kinda hate that you can pick up weapons as a free action, but can't stand up without sacrificing half of your movement. It should definitely be a bit trickier than drawing a sword.

Why are you taking a subclass where the best selling feature is boosting a backup weapon?

Kensei is a super easy fix too but they just screwed it up.

[Nagog]

Kensei could get a d10 which is only one step better than a spear anyway.

I just wish there was some way to make a rapier a monk weapon without having to take Kensei because overall the subclass is pretty weak.

You could grab the Weapon Master feat and take Rapier as one of the weapons. Also because it's a half feat, you get a +1 to Dex (or strength if you want to throw it away) on top.


In 5e, Monk disarms you. Seriously, the DMG disarm rules heavily favor someone who gets 4 attacks per round at 5th level. As for the "they can just pick the weapon up¹"... pick it up first, then chuck it. Laugh merrily.

Also... why have a +1 weapon you're going to use maybe one fight out of three if you can have a +3 weapon that doesn't cost you an attunement slot that you're going to use roughly the same amount of time? Sure, it costs you 3 ki for the fight... but at that level 3 ki is nothing unless you're spamming that button like it's going out of style. And if you're in "I have to use a bow!" territory, you can't use your biggest ki sink (Stunning Strike) anyway.

¹ On a side note, I kinda hate that you can pick up weapons as a free action, but can't stand up without sacrificing half of your movement. It should definitely be a bit trickier than drawing a sword.

It is a good point, I'd love to be able to disarm people with more than just a monk. I don't remember who it was or where they posted it, but I remember hearing of a Swashbuckler Rogue who had high enough initiative to use their first turn to walk up to an enemy and draw their weapon before they had time to draw it themselves. Idk how many DMs are lenient enough to allow that, as time doesn't pause for everybody else for you turn, but it's pretty fun to imagine.

As for magic items to boost the viability of monks, I don't know of a lot of canon magic items that monks can use and that enhances their style, but I also don't particularly use a lot of canon magic items, I typically make my own tailored to the play style or aesthetic of the characters, things like a mechanical eye for our Artificer to cast Hunters Mark, a Wand of Minor Illusion that's mechanically just a heavy crossbow that looks like a spell instead of a bolt, a grappling hook to allow for advantage while climbing and allows grappling at a range of 10 feet, stuff like that. I could imagine a few items like that to enhance the Monk. Perhaps a Phantom Fist to give their Unarmed Attacks a 10 foot range? Probably a higher level item, but still fun. Could also give them arm bracers that grant a small AC bonus when they use the Dodge action (rather than patient defense bonus action). Perhaps even just handwraps that turn their unarmed strikes into +x magic attacks.

[Misterwhisper]

It is a good point, I'd love to be able to disarm people with more than just a monk. I don't remember who it was or where they posted it, but I remember hearing of a Swashbuckler Rogue who had high enough initiative to use their first turn to walk up to an enemy and draw their weapon before they had time to draw it themselves. Idk how many DMs are lenient enough to allow that, as time doesn't pause for everybody else for you turn, but it's pretty fun to imagine.

As for magic items to boost the viability of monks, I don't know of a lot of canon magic items that monks can use and that enhances their style, but I also don't particularly use a lot of canon magic items, I typically make my own tailored to the play style or aesthetic of the characters, things like a mechanical eye for our Artificer to cast Hunters Mark, a Wand of Minor Illusion that's mechanically just a heavy crossbow that looks like a spell instead of a bolt, a grappling hook to allow for advantage while climbing and allows grappling at a range of 10 feet, stuff like that. I could imagine a few items like that to enhance the Monk. Perhaps a Phantom Fist to give their Unarmed Attacks a 10 foot range? Probably a higher level item, but still fun. Could also give them arm bracers that grant a small AC bonus when they use the Dodge action (rather than patient defense bonus action). Perhaps even just handwraps that turn their unarmed strikes into +x magic attacks.

Just being proficient will still not make it a monk weapon.

That was me actually who played the swashbuckler.


I just held their weapon if I could not sneak attack with it.

[JNAProductions]

Why are you taking a subclass where the best selling feature is boosting a backup weapon?

Kensei is a super easy fix too but they just screwed it up.

Who said Kensei's best feature is a back-up weapon?

[Max_Killjoy]

This is a common misconception. People often assume that the first tier of play passes quickly. In fact, that's where most play happens.

Here's a post discussing data from the D&D Beyond platform: https://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?6028-90-of-D-D-Games-Stop-By-Level-10-Wizards-More-Popular-At-Higher-Levels. As you can see, tier 1 accounts for 62.8% of all play.

That's why feel at low levels is so important (and is also why I don't personally care about tier 4). For many players, that's the only experience they'll get with the class.

If most campaigns are fairly short, then most play could happen in 1 and 2, AND they could still go by quickly.

But either way, if most play takes place in levels 10 and under, it does call into question the entire build approach that seems to dominate these forums, of "well you're building for level 15 here" or whatever.

[JNAProductions]

If most campaigns are fairly short, then most play could happen in 1 and 2, AND they could still go by quickly.

But either way, if most play takes place in levels 10 and under, it does call into question the entire build approach that seems to dominate these forums, of "well you're building for level 15 here" or whatever.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter where MOST play takes place for your table. It matters where YOUR play takes place.

Now, WotC should both 1) focus on where most play takes place, since they're providing play for EVERYONE and 2) make sure the game is fun at all levels they release, since that's their job.

[Misterwhisper]

Who said Kensei's best feature is a back-up weapon?

Being able to make your own + 3 weapon is their best feature mainly because so few games will ever hit their highest feature.

Getting an extra monk weapon is nice but it can only take you from a d8 to a d10, or use a whip.

Their archery option is good but monks still lose out on a lot using a bow.

Agile parry means you are using your new fancy kensei weapon once a turn and unarmed the rest of the 1 to 3 times.

Making them magic is completely pointless as soon as you get an actual magic weapon or you just unarmed them anyway.

The mini crit is not worth a ki point.

Unerring strike is great and exactly what a Kensei should be doing.

[Nagog]

Just being proficient will still not make it a monk weapon.

That was me actually who played the swashbuckler.


I just held their weapon if I could not sneak attack with it.

Oh dang, small forum! :D loved that btw. So what about the Rapier do you want to replicate into a Monk weapon? My DM lets me reskin the Shortsword to whatever aesthetic I'd like, and it's already versatile as a Monk weapon. If you want the d8 of damage, I'd nab Magic Initiate for Shillelagh and a few other perks. As is, the rapier would reach the MA die scaling at 11th level, and in many cases a +1 shortsword is just about on equal footing.

[Misterwhisper]

Oh dang, small forum! :D loved that btw. So what about the Rapier do you want to replicate into a Monk weapon? My DM lets me reskin the Shortsword to whatever aesthetic I'd like, and it's already versatile as a Monk weapon. If you want the d8 of damage, I'd nab Magic Initiate for Shillelagh and a few other perks. As is, the rapier would reach the MA die scaling at 11th level, and in many cases a +1 shortsword is just about on equal footing.

It is the closest I can get to an unarmored duelist because they have yet to put out a subclass for it.

Swashbuckler is close but one sneak attack instead of the multiple attacks and parries does not feel the same.

Battlemaster has the cool maneuvers but not the unarmored part.

[Nagog]

It is the closest I can get to an unarmored duelist because they have yet to put out a subclass for it.

Swashbuckler is close but one sneak attack instead of the multiple attacks and parries does not feel the same.

Battlemaster has the cool maneuvers but not the unarmored part.

Have you looked at Bladesinger Wizard? Two levels of that and the rest into a class of your choice (Battlemaster is what I'd choose, followed closely by Swashbuckler. I wouldn't go monk because much of their abilities don't work with the weapon as you stated) could pull off the feel you're looking for, also providing you with some nifty spells to use in a pinch.

[Amechra]

Why are you taking a subclass where the best selling feature is boosting a backup weapon?

Kensei is a super easy fix too but they just screwed it up.

The selling point? Nah. It is, however, a useful one.

Could the Kensei be better? Most definitely. But I'm glad we got what we did instead of a monster like the Hexblade¹.

¹ Hexblade infuriates me, since it gives you a little bit of an incentive to go into melee... and then gives you a damage/crit booster that works just fine (if not better) with your Eldritch Blast. It also added yet another reason to dip Warlock, because Hexblade's Curse is a really overtuned, shows up at 1st level, and scales independently of your levels in Warlock.

[Misterwhisper]

The selling point? Nah. It is, however, a useful one.

Could the Kensei be better? Most definitely. But I'm glad we got what we did instead of a monster like the Hexblade¹.

¹ Hexblade infuriates me, since it gives you a little bit of an incentive to go into melee... and then gives you a damage/crit booster that works just fine (if not better) with your Eldritch Blast. It also added yet another reason to dip Warlock, because Hexblade's Curse is a really overtuned, shows up at 1st level, and scales independently of your levels in Warlock.

Completely agree on hexblade.

It is the same as deepstalker ranger, they just threw out a bandaid fix for the base class being meh by making a subclass that is broken

Kensei would have been great if unarmed strike was an option of melee weapon.

Give them unarmed strike and one other weapon as Kensei weapons.

Can make their Kensei weapon plus one two and three at level 6, 11, 17.

At 6 the mini crit ability.

At 11 you can make flurry attacks with your Kensei weapon as well.

At 17 retold one miss if melee and can channel stunning strike if ranged for an extra ki.


Actually Kensei should just be a melee subclass and they should have just made zen archer it’s own subclass

[Trickery]

But either way, if most play takes place in levels 10 and under, it does call into question the entire build approach that seems to dominate these forums, of "well you're building for level 15 here" or whatever.

I agree. Regardless of class or the role you want to fulfill with a build, you need to know which level you're going to be playing at. Most of the time, it isn't going to be level 14 or later when the Monk really takes off (though is still tame compared to Wizards by that point).

[bendking]

One quick-fix (which isn't really a fix but a band-aid) is taking Human Variant with Mobile. You probably won't need any other feat anyway and now can take ASI's all the way to 20.
I find this feat to make so much sense with the Monk toolkit I'm almost surprised it isn't a class feature.

Just to emphasize: you get the speed of the Elf while getting the Swashbuckler's level 3 ability (kind of) at level 1 without actually taking neither Elf or Swashbuckler. It's awesome.
That said, I will never play a Monk that isn't a V.Human because of this.

[Amechra]

One quick-fix (which isn't really a fix but a band-aid) is taking Human Variant with Mobile. You probably won't need any other feat anyway and now can take ASI's all the way to 20.
I find this feat to make so much sense with the Monk toolkit I'm almost surprised it isn't a class feature.

Just to emphasize: you get the speed of the Elf while getting the Swashbuckler's level 3 ability (kind of) at level 1 without actually taking neither Elf or Swashbuckler. It's awesome.
That said, I will never play a Monk that isn't a V.Human because of this.

If you want the free disengage... all of the Drunken Monk. Drunken Technique is a mini Step of the Wind stapled on all of your Flurries.

The lack of feats for Monks other than Mobile is a thing that probably could (and should!) be fixed - it'd be really nice if Tavern Brawler wasn't garbage for them, for example...

One thing I wish had happened was for Flurry of Blows to be worded more like Extra Attack. It'd be nice if I could take Crossbow Expert on my Monk, BA with my hand crossbow, and then Flurry to punch someone in the face. Or otherwise pick up a bonus action attack without going "whelp, I'm never going to use this."

Hmm... if there was a subclass that got "whenever you spend Ki, you may make an unarmed attack as a reaction", what level do you think it would come in at?

[bendking]

If you want the free disengage... all of the Drunken Monk. Drunken Technique is a mini Step of the Wind stapled on all of your Flurries.

The lack of feats for Monks other than Mobile is a thing that probably could (and should!) be fixed - it'd be really nice if Tavern Brawler wasn't garbage for them, for example...

One thing I wish had happened was for Flurry of Blows to be worded more like Extra Attack. It'd be nice if I could take Crossbow Expert on my Monk, BA with my hand crossbow, and then Flurry to punch someone in the face. Or otherwise pick up a bonus action attack without going "whelp, I'm never going to use this."

Hmm... if there was a subclass that got "whenever you spend Ki, you may make an unarmed attack as a reaction", what level do you think it would come in at?

Yeah, but maybe you don't want Drunken Monk which isn't really a very good subclass?

[Nagog]

If you want the free disengage... all of the Drunken Monk. Drunken Technique is a mini Step of the Wind stapled on all of your Flurries.

The lack of feats for Monks other than Mobile is a thing that probably could (and should!) be fixed - it'd be really nice if Tavern Brawler wasn't garbage for them, for example...

One thing I wish had happened was for Flurry of Blows to be worded more like Extra Attack. It'd be nice if I could take Crossbow Expert on my Monk, BA with my hand crossbow, and then Flurry to punch someone in the face. Or otherwise pick up a bonus action attack without going "whelp, I'm never going to use this."

Hmm... if there was a subclass that got "whenever you spend Ki, you may make an unarmed attack as a reaction", what level do you think it would come in at?

I don't think in RAW you'd be able to get a Crossbow shot as a BA and a Flurry attack as BA since you only really get one BA per round. Depending on DM ruling, you may be able to use the bit of spending a Ki point for one.

I used to think Way of the Drunken Master was kind of a weak subclass, considering it only really shines when you're surrounded. Then my party fought one and I realized how great it really is.

Reaction attack on spending Ki? Presuming it's on your turn, you may not need to expend your reaction unless you decide it's worth losing your AoO for the next round in exchange. I think it may make more sense if you gained an ability to make an unarmed attack as a parry when somebody misses you with an attack? Perhaps add a bit of flavor to Patient Defense with it and say you also get to attack on a hit if you used Patient Defense, and gate it behind 11th level. I'm currently playing a subclass called Way of the Navigator and it has a class ability at level 3 that when an enemy misses you while you have Patient Defense up, they're charmed by you until the end of your next turn, which is nifty and great for multiattacking enemies, but something like a counterattack is a bit higher grade so I think level 10 or 11 should fit.

[Misterwhisper]

Yeah, but maybe you don't want Drunken Monk which isn't really a very good subclass?

Drunken master is a very nice subclass.

[Nagog]

Drunken master is a very nice subclass.

Drunken Master is an excellent subclass for dealing with large groups of enemies. For BBEGs, they're... Less so.

[Misterwhisper]

Drunken Master is an excellent subclass for dealing with large groups of enemies. For BBEGs, they're... Less so.

No worse than any other monk.

Same flurry, same unarmed damage, same weapon choice other than Kensei which does not make a big difference.

They however save a ki with a free disengage with their flurry so if you need to be defensive they are very efficient.

Their later ability to make 3 extra flurry attacks only the flurry attacks have to be against different targets so you could still normal attack x 2, flurry for one on the main target and then have 4 more attacks left to make on other people, if all that is left is the BBEG just normal flurry and attack them 4 times.

Redirect attack is amazing, it turns the enemy missing you into an audio o hit against someone else in 5ft, not a roll against them a straight up hit. That storm giant swinging a giant greatsword could just splatter his right hand man with a miss.

Drunkards luck might only come up every once in a while but it can easily Make a huge difference.

I would actually call drunken master probably the best monk subclass.

Open hand is a close second though.



Fixing issues with a monk is easy:

Introduce unarmed weapons like knuckles or wraps or something of the like and put them in random loot rolls just like other weapons.

Also a minor thing, make a feat that a monk would really like.

The best combat feats like: PAM, GWM, shield master, crossbow expert and SS are not going to work for a monk most of the time and monks can not afford feats much at all so you don’t have to worry about combining them.

[Frozenstep]

I had a drunken master in the first campaign I DM'd. It was a pirate-themed campaign, so guns galore for enemies.

They abused the heck out of going prone to impose disadvantage on enemy ranged attacks. It only cost them 5 feet of movement on their next turn, and with all their speed, they could easily flurry and then move far enough away that enemies couldn't get close enough to take advantage of the advantage on melee attacks.

[Nagog]

No worse than any other monk.


Long Death monks have some good Single target Damage with Touch of the Long Death, and Way of the Four Elements has some pretty great spells for damage output that beats out Drunken Master (I mean Flurry of Blows and a Fireball make fore great sustainable DPR), and if you have a Rogue in the party that needs flanking, a Shadow Monk's Opportunist can scale damage really well on single targets. And obviously Way of the Open Hand has amazing Single-Target Damage/Control options as well. So I'd say that pretty much every class besides Sun Soul (which has it's own niche as a ranged monk) and Way of the Drunken Master has some pretty great single-target damage.

[Misterwhisper]

Long Death monks have some good Single target Damage with Touch of the Long Death, and Way of the Four Elements has some pretty great spells for damage output that beats out Drunken Master (I mean Flurry of Blows and a Fireball make fore great sustainable DPR), and if you have a Rogue in the party that needs flanking, a Shadow Monk's Opportunist can scale damage really well on single targets. And obviously Way of the Open Hand has amazing Single-Target Damage/Control options as well. So I'd say that pretty much every class besides Sun Soul (which has it's own niche as a ranged monk) and Way of the Drunken Master has some pretty great single-target damage.

Touch of long death is crazy expensive to the point of it almost never coming up.

4 elements fireball is 4 ki at level 11 to throw a fireball that the wizard threw at level 5. The best it can do is spending 6 ki to throw a fireball like a level 9 caster. And it takes your action so no flurry.

Open hand has great control with their flurry bonuses but quivering palm is a little over rated. After you hit you spend 3 ki, then you have to spend another full action to have them make a save against generally the best save for most npcs.

When it works it is a game changer and a highlight of an event. If they save it is about the same damage compared to your normal full round attacking.

Open hand would be the best subclass for monk in my opinion if they had a better level 11 ability.

Shadow monk is amazing at its utility and versatility but opportunist is just a rather reliable extra attack assuming you do not have other reaction uses.

It is hard to argue against 7 attacks a round at high levels doing 1d10 + 5 ish a hit.

[Nagog]

Touch of long death is crazy expensive to the point of it almost never coming up.

4 elements fireball is 4 ki at level 11 to throw a fireball that the wizard threw at level 5. The best it can do is spending 6 ki to throw a fireball like a level 9 caster. And it takes your action so no flurry.

Open hand has great control with their flurry bonuses but quivering palm is a little over rated. After you hit you spend 3 ki, then you have to spend another full action to have them make a save against generally the best save for most npcs.

When it works it is a game changer and a highlight of an event. If they save it is about the same damage compared to your normal full round attacking.

Open hand would be the best subclass for monk in my opinion if they had a better level 11 ability.

Shadow monk is amazing at its utility and versatility but opportunist is just a rather reliable extra attack assuming you do not have other reaction uses.

It is hard to argue against 7 attacks a round at high levels doing 1d10 + 5 ish a hit.

you don't get 7 attacks against a single enemy. That's the point. Also I'm not sure where you got 7, as it maxes out at 5, with three additional attacks.

[stoutstien]

you don't get 7 attacks against a single enemy. That's the point. Also I'm not sure where you got 7, as it maxes out at 5, with three additional attacks.

I think he's counting the attack action with it also.

[Misterwhisper]

you don't get 7 attacks against a single enemy. That's the point. Also I'm not sure where you got 7, as it maxes out at 5, with three additional attacks.

It is 3 Extra flurry attacks not 3 total flurry.

3 of your attacks can on the same target if using all
The bonus attacks or 4 if normal flurry. For just 1 ki.

[Nagog]

I think he's counting the attack action with it also.


It is 3 Extra flurry attacks not 3 total flurry.

3 of your attacks can on the same target if using all
The bonus attacks or 4 if normal flurry. For just 1 ki.

My math was off in not including the 2 attacks in the Attack Action, my bad.

But that doesn't change my point of the Drunken Master struggling bad against BBEGs, while shining against hordes.

[Zetakya]

Speaking as someone who is playing one at the minute, Drunken Master is utterly hilarious in game.

I'm basically the comic relief of the troupe, and it's amazing what you can get away with if you keep up the performance and have everyone underestimating you in character.

Redirect Attack and Drunken Technique are just a license to cause mayhem.

I play the whole thing for slapstick with Performance, Sleight of Hand, Acrobatics and Athletics. There are so many ways in which Drunken Master can use their abilities to cause Social mayhem to your advantage that it's crazy.

The key to Drunken Master is to lean in to the over-the-top nature of the schtick and go with it.

[Nagog]

Speaking as someone who is playing one at the minute, Drunken Master is utterly hilarious in game.

I'm basically the comic relief of the troupe, and it's amazing what you can get away with if you keep up the performance and have everyone underestimating you in character.

Redirect Attack and Drunken Technique are just a license to cause mayhem.

I play the whole thing for slapstick with Performance, Sleight of Hand, Acrobatics and Athletics. There are so many ways in which Drunken Master can use their abilities to cause Social mayhem to your advantage that it's crazy.

The key to Drunken Master is to lean in to the over-the-top nature of the schtick and go with it.

I agree, the role-play potential of the Drunken Master sounds like a blast. I really want to make a Drunken Master/Bard character who specializes in drinking songs/games. It would be so incredibly MAD to the point of near unplayability, but it would also be loads of laughs and buckets of fun (and ale)

[Trickery]

Drunken Monk is quite good. It might even be the best overall considering that it has no bad features.

There's a silly thing you can do with Redirect Attack. Have your ally pickup something massive, heavy, and unwieldy that he definitely isn't proficient with and swing it at you. If it misses, and it probably will especially if your ally has disadvantage (or if the DM rules he can miss on purpose), you can use your reaction to cause it to hit a different target within 5' of you. The target doesn't even need to be within 5' of the attacker.

Obviously, this requires some DM fiat. There are several things silly about this scenario. But it's fun.

Edit: and this feature can be gamed in other ways. If you can convince your team to stack Shield of Faith and Haste on you, and perhaps you have some +AC from magic items as well, then you can merely walk among hard-hitting enemies and take the Dodge action to avoid their attacks, letting them kill each other.

[Zetakya]

If you haven't ever managed to single-handedly start and end a bar fight as a Drunken Master, then you're just not trying.

One of my favourite tricks is the "You're my mate, you are" friendly drunk routine in the middle of a bunch of people who are trying to do something serious and harmful. As soon as one of them shoves you away, you can artfully stagger into another one, add a bit of grapple, maybe hit someone and pull Stunning Fist.

I also have Sleight of Hand, and I have got away with hitting them to activate Stunning Fist with a covert elbow, or a one inch punch, without anyone noticing (at least until it's too late). You get Performance from Drunken Master too; try distracting people by chugging a whole keg of ale while you kick someone hard enough under the table to break their legs. Then you throw the barrel at someone else and the bar brawl starts.

Did I mention that this is a Dwarven Drunken Monk? I get in a lot of Bar Brawls.

[Nagog]

Drunken Monk is quite good. It might even be the best overall considering that it has no bad features.

There's a silly thing you can do with Redirect Attack. Have your ally pickup something massive, heavy, and unwieldy that he definitely isn't proficient with and swing it at you. If it misses, and it probably will especially if your ally has disadvantage (or if the DM rules he can miss on purpose), you can use your reaction to cause it to hit a different target within 5' of you. The target doesn't even need to be within 5' of the attacker.

Obviously, this requires some DM fiat. There are several things silly about this scenario. But it's fun.

Edit: and this feature can be gamed in other ways. If you can convince your team to stack Shield of Faith and Haste on you, and perhaps you have some +AC from magic items as well, then you can merely walk among hard-hitting enemies and take the Dodge action to avoid their attacks, letting them kill each other.

The mental image this summoned forth from the void is made infinitely better because for some reason the monk was just strolling through the battle field, somehow oblivious to the battle around him XD


If you haven't ever managed to single-handedly start and end a bar fight as a Drunken Master, then you're just not trying.

One of my favourite tricks is the "You're my mate, you are" friendly drunk routine in the middle of a bunch of people who are trying to do something serious and harmful. As soon as one of them shoves you away, you can artfully stagger into another one, add a bit of grapple, maybe hit someone and pull Stunning Fist.

I also have Sleight of Hand, and I have got away with hitting them to activate Stunning Fist with a covert elbow, or a one inch punch, without anyone noticing (at least until it's too late). You get Performance from Drunken Master too; try distracting people by chugging a whole keg of ale while you kick someone hard enough under the table to break their legs. Then you throw the barrel at someone else and the bar brawl starts.

Did I mention that this is a Dwarven Drunken Monk? I get in a lot of Bar Brawls.

Alrighty, it's official. My Bard Brawler must be born forthwith! I may even go with a Bugbear for the extra range, get as many people involved in the fun as possible. It would be absolutely terrible for the stat bonuses synergizing with either of the classes, but part of the fun is that they're absolutely terrible at whatever they do. Perhaps that's why their a drunk? XD

[Zetakya]

The mental image this summoned forth from the void is made infinitely better because for some reason the monk was just strolling through the battle field, somehow oblivious to the battle around him XD



Alrighty, it's official. My Bard Brawler must be born forthwith! I may even go with a Bugbear for the extra range, get as many people involved in the fun as possible. It would be absolutely terrible for the stat bonuses synergizing with either of the classes, but part of the fun is that they're absolutely terrible at whatever they do. Perhaps that's why their a drunk? XD

Honestly, you really don't need the Bard part. You've got quite enough fun going on with just Monk.

On the actual optimisation side of things, Hill Dwarf is a actually a really good Monk Combination, partly for the sheer number of Hit Points you can get, and partly because there are two really useful Racial Feats (Squat Nimbleness and Dwarven Fortitude).

As I described him in a thread a few weeks back:


Dwarven Society is composed hard-working, dedicated and responsible adults, all with a stake in the success and prosperity of their society.

There's an exception to every rule. Ucat Nônub is that exception.


Ucat is a slob, a layabout, a drunkard and a wastrel. He owes money to half the settlement, and can usually only pay his own way by bartering the mushroom beer he brews in the foetid cellar beneath the fort for edible food. He dresses in a threadbare tabbard and a loincloth, and usually reeks of stale beer, tobacco, sweat and mushroom soup. He probably hasn't spent five minutes in the last 10 years sober, and only the legendary Dwarven Constitution can possibly be keeping him alive.

He is also the deadliest unarmed fighter his home settlement has ever seen.


Level 9 Hill Dwarf Monk, Drunken Master.
STR 10, DEX 16, CON 16, INT 8, WIS 16, CHA 12
Feat: Dwarven Fortitude
Background: Urchin
Feature: City Secrets
Skill Proficiencies: Acrobatics, Athletics, Performance, Slight-of-Hand, Stealth
AC: 16
To Hit: +7
Damage: D6+3
Movement: 40ft

[Misterwhisper]

I played a half orc drunken master who caused a session to end early because he stunned someone on his first attack, grappled them with his second and the proceeded to punch they guy with his own hand saying, “stop hitting yourself” and when I asked whether to use my unarmed strike or his the dm laughed so hard he called the game early.

[samcifer]

So today my dm roommate's wife had her sister over and the dm decided to run a quick, random 1-shot with lv. 6 characters with starting stats (before racial bonuses) of 18, 18, 16, 16, 15, and 15, so I figured that it would be the perfect time to try playing a monk. I went with an aarakocra sun soul monk and the dm let us each have a +1 item, so I asked if I could get arm and leg wraps that gave +1 to-hit and he said yes. We only had a single battle and most of my time in it (against some undead geese) was spent within 5ft. of them, so the range never got used. I only tried to stun once and failed, so I focused instead on attacking 4 times per turn and killed half of the 6 foes. Then within the dungeon, my high dex saved me from a poison dart trap and helped me to angle mirrors to reflect light in a room filling rapidly with sand to open the way out.

It wasn't much of a campaign to be honest, but I really loved having 20 AC and hitting 4 times per turn. Maybe if I had gone open-hand I could've done more than just hit, but who knows. Maybe I'll give the class a chance some day, but not in a mid-range campaign where it wounds as if the damage of the monk suffers most.

[djreynolds]

Most monks can begin play with 16 dex and wis, 16 AC and can it for 1d8 with a staff/spear and then as BA 1d4, or then can spend 1 ki for FOB, patient defense, or step of the wind

A paladin can begin play with a 16 str and chr, 18 AC and hit 1d8 with long sword and can smite 3xs at 3rd level, or use a BA for shield of faith or a smite spell

Most melee types can begin play with similar stats, similar damage out put, similar AC.

The characters in the game are not equal, they are close

If you want to play a grunt... their is the fighter class.

If you want to play a jet pilot.... paladin comes close.

You are playing a monk for a reason, a choice. And you have to play to its strengths. Speed and dexterity, move in and out of combat. And short rest

After every fight, short rest. The two classes who doesn't short rest is a rogue or sorcerer, the barbarian has to because he/she got hit by a freight train. After every fight, ask the party "Can we short rest?" And the paladin should want to, to get back his/her channel divinity.

My successful tips on playing a monk.

1. Grab a short bow or long bow, you have a high dexterity so use it
2. Choose your options for your BA/ki usage
3. Max out your attack stat, some say wisdom but IMO a 16 is good enough till your dex is a 20, then put ASI here
4. Short rest, force the DM to roll for a random encounter as it usually 1d12 and on a 12 means you face a random encounter
5. Grab a quarterstaff or spear, its 1d8 and should be used for your primary attacks
6. Feats to think of are observant (helps not being ambushed), mobile feat plays to your tactics, tough is good, lucky
7. Attack the flanks to limit getting ganged up on and to squeeze the enemy to the tanks
8. Get to the caster or archer, a longbow/short bow helps with this
9. Nothing wrong with taking the dodge action if needed when you are out of KI
10. Low on health, get out of melee and use that bow

[Amechra]

To the people talking about picking up a bow...

Unless you pick it as a Kensei Weapon at 3rd (and you're a Kensei, of course), they aren't Monk weapons. So using them will shut down your Unarmored Defense (and Martial Arts/Unarmored Movement, but those are less pressing if you are doing the bow thing.)

Not a deal breaker, really, but something to keep in mind.

---

Speaking of Kensei, a part of me really likes the idea of picking Hand Crossbows at 3rd level, then picking up Crossbow Expert at 4th. Fluff the whole thing as being a Grammaton Cleric using gun kata moves. It'd be nicer if I could pull it off without needing to go full Kensei, but them's the breaks.

[Daghoulish]

To the people talking about picking up a bow...

Unless you pick it as a Kensei Weapon at 3rd (and you're a Kensei, of course), they aren't Monk weapons. So using them will shut down your Unarmored Defense (and Martial Arts/Unarmored Movement, but those are less pressing if you are doing the bow thing.)

Not a deal breaker, really, but something to keep in mind.

---

Speaking of Kensei, a part of me really likes the idea of picking Hand Crossbows at 3rd level, then picking up Crossbow Expert at 4th. Fluff the whole thing as being a Grammaton Cleric using gun kata moves. It'd be nicer if I could pull it off without needing to go full Kensei, but them's the breaks.

Only Martial Arts cares about monk weapons, Unarmed Defense/Movement only require no armor and no shield.


unarmored defense: the only stipulation is not using a shield. says nothing about weapons.

Unarmored movement: same

Martial arts/ flurry: yep still usable even if you're not using a monk weapon.

before your Martial arts dices gett increased there's not a big difference between using a monk weapon or a bow.

Martial Arts does require monk weapons, flurry doesn't but then your only doing 1+str per hit. The first line of Martial Arts is "At 1st level, you gain the following benefits while you are unarmed or wielding only monk weapons and you aren't wearing armor or wielding a shield"

[stoutstien]

To the people talking about picking up a bow...

Unless you pick it as a Kensei Weapon at 3rd (and you're a Kensei, of course), they aren't Monk weapons. So using them will shut down your Unarmored Defense (and Martial Arts/Unarmored Movement, but those are less pressing if you are doing the bow thing.)

Not a deal breaker, really, but something to keep in mind.

---

Speaking of Kensei, a part of me really likes the idea of picking Hand Crossbows at 3rd level, then picking up Crossbow Expert at 4th. Fluff the whole thing as being a Grammaton Cleric using gun kata moves. It'd be nicer if I could pull it off without needing to go full Kensei, but them's the breaks.

unarmored defense: the only stipulation is not using a shield. says nothing about weapons.

Unarmored movement: same

Martial arts/ flurry: yep still usable even if you're not using a monk weapon.

before your Martial arts dices gett increased there's not a big difference between using a monk weapon or a bow.

[Amechra]

Man, I'm blind. I was even looking at the actual class description when I wrote that...

Thank you, folks.

[stoutstien]

Man, I'm blind. I was even looking at the actual class description when I wrote that...

Thank you, folks.

We all do it. I had to reread it to make sure I wasn't mistakenly off base.

[Amechra]

So, a thought...

I don't think it would break anything if you A) removed the word "melee" from the definition of monk weapons, and B) let players pick any non-heavy, non-special martial weapon/longbows instead of shortswords.

I mean, arguably Monks would have some of the best early-level damage (two-handing a longsword + flurry), but bumping their main weapon up a die size really shouldn't break anything.

[Talsin]

So, a thought...

I don't think it would break anything if you A) removed the word "melee" from the definition of monk weapons, and B) let players pick any non-heavy, non-special martial weapon/longbows instead of shortswords.

I mean, arguably Monks would have some of the best early-level damage (two-handing a longsword + flurry), but bumping their main weapon up a die size really shouldn't break anything.

Funny you mention "Melee"... Does it seem odd to anyone that in the hands of a Monk for level 11 and up, a Javelin is better than a Spear? Just carry a bundle of them and you'll probably never have to switch-hit again.

[Trickery]

Funny you mention "Melee"... Does it seem odd to anyone that in the hands of a Monk for level 11 and up, a Javelin is better than a Spear? Just carry a bundle of them and you'll probably never have to switch-hit again.

True, but weapons are weird like that. The light hammer is worse than the handaxe for no reason, and the trident is worse than the spear (weight and cost) despite the trident being martial and the spear simple. The list of "good" weapons is about half the size of the weapons table.

[Talsin]

True, but weapons are weird like that. The light hammer is worse than the handaxe for no reason, and the trident is worse than the spear (weight and cost) despite the trident being martial and the spear simple. The list of "good" weapons is about half the size of the weapons table.

Granted, the Trident was grandfathered in as a nod to the weapon in previous editions.
Honestly, they should have removed it, and let items that are flavored as tridents be the same function of a spear.

However, we digress...

I was considering another option; giving monks an additional attack when they make a flurry (to a total of 2 normal attacks, 3 from bonus action flurry for 5 total.), but realized this pushes the potential for stun-storming to an even greater degree.

[Skylivedk]

Granted, the Trident was grandfathered in as a nod to the weapon in previous editions.
Honestly, they should have removed it, and let items that are flavored as tridents be the same function of a spear.

However, we digress...

I was considering another option; giving monks an additional attack when they make a flurry (to a total of 2 normal attacks, 3 from bonus action flurry for 5 total.), but realized this pushes the potential for stun-storming to an even greater degree.

We've done it at our table for level 8 and upwards (we also do it for dual wield). It works pretty well. The monk is still not touching the Barbarian in DPR, but doesn't feel completely let off the train

[Misterwhisper]

We've done it at our table for level 8 and upwards (we also do it for dual wield). It works pretty well. The monk is still not touching the Barbarian in DPR, but doesn't feel completely let off the train

That is not a problem with the monk or barbarian but a problem with great weapon master and or polearm master.

No feats wise a monk at 8th will do 36 damage or so a round on average a barbarian will be doing 28 at normal rage, and 35.5 if zealot.

It is when you add in 20 more damage because of GWM or an extra 19 as well if they also have Pam.

The issue is the feats not the class.

Monks get almost not in feat support

[Talsin]

That is not a problem with the monk or barbarian but a problem with great weapon master and or polearm master.

No feats wise a monk at 8th will do 36 damage or so a round on average a barbarian will be doing 28 at normal rage, and 35.5 if zealot.

It is when you add in 20 more damage because of GWM or an extra 19 as well if they also have Pam.

The issue is the feats not the class.

Monks get almost not in feat support

Well, that's assuming both max their damage stat, and hit with all attacks, and the monk uses flurry starting with a 1d8 weapon, AND while a barb is using a 2d6 weapon while raging. It doesn't take into account barbarian crit damage increases (which is better if using a 1d12 weapon), or reckless (which would increase frequency of hitting/critting), or subclass-frenzy(which adds it up to 42 though we all know it's a trap), or storm barb bonus-action aura damage of 3-6 (marginally unavoidable), or if their barbarian was even using the feats, OR if their barbarian was dual-wielding as would grant him 4 attacks instead of 3 vs the monks 5 attacks with the flurry which becomes a whole other slew of calculations...

REGARDLESS of all this, I still agree that the feat makes substantial differences in damage quality, however Barbarian will still have better staying power over a monk with the higher hit die and damage resistances, and all those other tank-y things they do.

[Misterwhisper]

Well, that's assuming both max their damage stat, and hit with all attacks, and the monk uses flurry starting with a 1d8 weapon, AND while a barb is using a 2d6 weapon while raging. It doesn't take into account barbarian crit damage increases (which is better if using a 1d12 weapon), or reckless (which would increase frequency of hitting/critting), or subclass-frenzy(which adds it up to 42 though we all know it's a trap), or storm barb bonus-action aura damage of 3-6 (marginally unavoidable), or if their barbarian was even using the feats, OR if their barbarian was dual-wielding as would grant him 4 attacks instead of 3 vs the monks 5 attacks with the flurry which becomes a whole other slew of calculations...

REGARDLESS of all this, I still agree that the feat makes substantial differences in damage quality, however Barbarian will still have better staying power over a monk with the higher hit die and damage resistances, and all those other tank-y things they do.

The issues though is there is massive boosting coming from feats for pretty much all weapon based classes except for monks.

Barbarians can get PAM and GWM
Fighter can take anything really.
Paladin is same as barbarian on feats
Rangers can take whichever set they build for either melee or ranged
Rogues love some nice crossbow expert

Monks though... nothing really.

[Trickery]

The issues though is there is massive boosting coming from feats for pretty much all weapon based classes except for monks.

Barbarians can get PAM and GWM
Fighter can take anything really.
Paladin is same as barbarian on feats
Rangers can take whichever set they build for either melee or ranged
Rogues love some nice crossbow expert

Monks though... nothing really.

Monks can in theory gain some benefit from feats like Mage Slayer and Sentinel. Mage slayer is trash, but Sentinel has some use on any class that stays in melee. Trouble is that the Monk is best off not staying in melee.

Beyond that, a Kensei can take Sharpshooter and do alright with a Longbow. But it's not as good for them as it is on other archer classes - they really want two levels of Fighter for archery and action surge if they want to push that envelope. At that point, the Monk features are more there for mobility and utility than as something you do on the regular.

[Talionis]

I endorse that the ASI MAD Monk and Barbarian both should get at least one extra ASI.

Both Fighter and Rogue are more SAD. By forcing ASI into Stats it hurts creativity to have more individuality on Monks and Barbarians.

[Skylivedk]

That is not a problem with the monk or barbarian but a problem with great weapon master and or polearm master.

No feats wise a monk at 8th will do 36 damage or so a round on average a barbarian will be doing 28 at normal rage, and 35.5 if zealot.

It is when you add in 20 more damage because of GWM or an extra 19 as well if they also have Pam.

The issue is the feats not the class.

Monks get almost not in feat support

I don't think it's a problem with regards to what the feats do. It's a problem that feats are necessary for martials to be viable at all. It's a horrible way of gating martial prowess, but do away with them and whatch the other martials cry as your Padlock goes to town and outshine them in damn near everything.

Without feats, martials run off their cliff even faster.